IRC log of tagmem on 2010-10-20

Timestamps are in UTC.

00:00:09 [duerst]
duerst has joined #tagmem
00:03:46 [masinter]
00:03:46 [masinter]
https://workgreen.webex.com/workgreen/j.php?ED=147474617&UID=483233937&RT=MiMxMQ%3D%3D
00:03:46 [masinter]
00:03:46 [masinter]
audio conference only:
00:03:50 [masinter]
Call-in toll number (US/Canada): 1-408-792-6300
00:03:53 [masinter]
Global call-in numbers:
00:03:56 [masinter]
https://workgreen.webex.com/workgreen/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=147474682&tollFree=0
00:03:59 [masinter]
Access code:969 965 383
00:04:02 [masinter]
00:04:06 [masinter]
00:29:51 [abarth]
http://github.com/abarth/url-spec/blob/master/drafts/url.txt
00:29:56 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
00:32:17 [noahm]
noahm has joined #tagmem
00:43:05 [abarth]
http://github.com/abarth/url-spec/blob/master/tests/gurl-results/by-browser.txt
00:53:55 [jar_]
jar_ has joined #tagmem
01:01:55 [masinter]
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/iri/trac/ticket/18
01:02:05 [masinter]
here seems to be little hope of relying on either administrative or technical means to reduce the availability of spoofing exploits. For this reason, user agents SHOULD NOT relying on humans doing visual or perceptual comparison or verification of IRIs as any means of validating or assuring safety, correctness or appropriateness of an IRI. Other means of presenting users with the validity, safety, or appropriateness of visited sites are
01:02:05 [masinter]
being developed in the browser community as an alternative means of avoiding these difficulties
01:13:05 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tagmem
02:36:00 [jar_]
jar_ has joined #tagmem
03:34:29 [duerst]
duerst has joined #tagmem
04:01:08 [duerst]
duerst has left #tagmem
04:20:29 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
04:35:43 [DKA]
DKA has joined #tagmem
04:44:03 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
15:58:19 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
15:58:19 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/10/20-tagmem-irc
15:58:21 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
15:58:21 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #tagmem
15:58:23 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be TAG
15:58:23 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see TAG_f2f()11:30AM scheduled to start 28 minutes ago
15:58:24 [trackbot]
Meeting: Technical Architecture Group Teleconference
15:58:24 [trackbot]
Date: 20 October 2010
15:58:52 [johnk]
Chair: Noah
15:58:58 [johnk]
Scribe: JohnK
15:59:04 [johnk]
Scribe: johnk
15:59:28 [johnk]
Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/10/19-agenda
15:59:46 [jar_]
jar_ has joined #tagmem
15:59:53 [jar_]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/10/persistent-reference-slides.pdf
16:00:05 [johnk]
Topic: Domain Name Persistence
16:01:00 [timbl_]
timbl_ has joined #tagmem
16:01:21 [johnk]
NM: Quick agenda recap
16:01:41 [johnk]
NM: first topic is domain name persistence
16:01:54 [johnk]
NM: followed by Web App Architecture overview and privacy
16:02:10 [johnk]
NM: We have outside visitors in the afternoon
16:02:40 [johnk]
NM: *now* Domain Name Persistence
16:03:30 [johnk]
JAR: Reviewing these slides - http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/10/persistent-reference-slides.pdf
16:03:34 [raman]
.
16:04:26 [johnk]
JAR: summarizing my memo from last week - http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/persistent-reference/
16:04:38 [johnk]
JAR: document persistence vs. reference persistence
16:05:11 [johnk]
JAR: persistence is a "gamble" - no engineering solution that can guarantee persistence
16:05:37 [johnk]
JAR: so persistence says "there is a good bet this thing will be around in 100 years"
16:05:58 [johnk]
JAR: so there is a threat model talking about threats to that bet
16:06:13 [johnk]
JAT: TAG choices:
16:06:23 [johnk]
s/JAT/JAR/
16:06:40 [johnk]
JAR: i) embrace pluralism of solutions
16:06:59 [johnk]
JAR: ii) advocate for HTTP only - be convincing
16:07:11 [johnk]
JAR: iii) say nothing (~status quo)
16:07:34 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
16:08:18 [noahm]
noahm has joined #tagmem
16:08:43 [johnk]
JAR: scholarly publishing state of art contains DOIs in "hybrid refs" - textual metadata + a persistent, clickable DOI
16:09:16 [johnk]
JAR: clickable DOI is actually an HTTP URI
16:09:45 [timbl_]
agenda+ Mutial Aid
16:09:55 [timbl_]
Zakim?
16:10:32 [johnk]
JAR: if you say "just use HTTP", all the DOIs become HTTP URIs
16:10:56 [johnk]
JAR: W3C uses this "just use HTTP" model
16:11:00 [timbl_]
q+ to talk for 45 mins why the publishing industry doesn't buy it
16:11:47 [timbl_]
q+ timbl2 to suggest requiring an urn to http algorihm to be REGISTERD whenever a urn scheme is ucreated
16:11:58 [timbl_]
q+ timbl3 to medntion mutual aid
16:13:12 [johnk]
JAR: "Just say HTTP" - make a statement including the reasons as to why HTTP identifiers should be treated as being persistent
16:13:23 [johnk]
TVR: URL shortening services - do they play a role?
16:13:30 [johnk]
JAR: Not part of my thinking so far
16:14:30 [johnk]
JAR: scheme-agnostic approach would include specification of mappings from p.i. scheme URIs (e.g. doi) to equivalent HTTP URIs
16:14:37 [ht]
q+ to argue against the scheme-agnostic reference approach, based on JISC consensus
16:15:41 [Ashok]
q+
16:15:58 [johnk]
JAR: status quo is worse than either of these alternatives
16:16:27 [johnk]
q+ to ask whether anyone (including us) can do anything more than simply make a statement?
16:16:51 [timbl_]
We could do both of the above. Because even ig you allow a limit ednumber of doi: type things with defined maooings, yo have to look afte the persistence of many other http: things fro communities who just use the web and don't want to do doi:
16:16:54 [johnk]
JAR: sources of distrust
16:17:12 [noahm]
q+ to ask why the "do HTTP" option was presented so hesitantly
16:17:26 [johnk]
JAR: i) authoritative behaviour in HTTP is defined by protocol, not "social contract"
16:17:27 [noah]
zakim, noah is me
16:17:27 [Zakim]
sorry, noah, I do not recognize a party named 'noah'
16:18:29 [johnk]
JAR: ii) domain names are defined by IANA, where persistence is not considered a core value
16:19:23 [johnk]
JAR: iii) The Web is relatively new and still considered as part of the "wild west"
16:20:22 [ht]
q+ ht2 to endorse the status of namespace URIs as rigid designators
16:21:09 [timbl_]
so the tage should rage agsint inconsitency
16:21:56 [johnk]
JAR: TAG can argue for things that increase trust in HTTP
16:22:55 [timbl_]
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Persistence.html
16:23:39 [johnk]
JAR: (describes options from slide on 'Arguing for trust')
16:23:58 [johnk]
JAR: risks:
16:24:09 [johnk]
JAR: too hard to influence IANA/ICANN
16:24:19 [johnk]
JAR: hard to convince others to trust it
16:24:31 [ht]
q+ ht3 to say we could also try to 'fix' 3986
16:24:35 [johnk]
JAR: build it, but no-one uses it
16:24:41 [timbl_]
You can replace the root DNS server in yoru local area with a persistent one
16:25:12 [timbl_]
You can make a whitelist of sites which are deemed persostent and have a scobdary parallel lookup mechanism
16:25:52 [johnk]
JAR: risks of status quo
16:26:09 [johnk]
JAR: increasing demand leads to increasing inconsistency
16:26:43 [johnk]
JAR: what can we do to advance this decision process?
16:27:47 [johnk]
q?
16:28:27 [noah]
ack next
16:28:28 [Zakim]
timbl_, you wanted to talk for 45 mins why the publishing industry doesn't buy it
16:29:27 [jar_]
timbl: Do both
16:29:28 [johnk]
TBL: should do "both" (pursue both DOI and similar AND also HTTP persistence)
16:30:24 [johnk]
TBL: if you are going to have DOIs or other schemes, should include a requirement that there is an algorithm for mapping for returning a "pdf" (or other document)
16:30:37 [jar_]
q?
16:31:14 [johnk]
TBL: would like to have the .arc implemented
16:31:27 [jar_]
q+ to talk about choice facing ORCID
16:31:48 [raman]
Noah, I'm having Rohit come over and be here in my stead, need to run to a meeting -- back by 11:40
16:31:49 [johnk]
TBL: note Mutual Aid
16:32:30 [johnk]
TBL: (via Jonathan Zittrain)
16:32:46 [ht]
seems v. close to ARK to me
16:33:16 [timbl_]
.ark
16:33:22 [ht]
(John Kunze)
16:33:39 [noah]
q?
16:33:41 [noah]
ack next
16:33:42 [Zakim]
timbl2, you wanted to suggest requiring an urn to http algorihm to be REGISTERD whenever a urn scheme is ucreated
16:33:45 [noah]
ack next
16:33:47 [Zakim]
timbl3, you wanted to medntion mutual aid
16:33:52 [noah]
ack next
16:33:53 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to argue against the scheme-agnostic reference approach, based on JISC consensus
16:34:21 [johnk]
HT: can make the scheme-agnostic proposal stronger
16:34:54 [johnk]
HT: based on London meeting - proponents of alternative schemes all signed up to a statement -
16:35:25 [johnk]
HT: best way forward is that anyone who pubs refs should publish HTTP references (either alongside, or instead of any other reference)
16:37:16 [johnk]
HT: so we can legitimately endorse publishing mappings from other schemes to HTTP URIs
16:37:46 [ht]
[E]nsure that actionable http URI manifestations are available for
16:37:46 [ht]
any non-native http URI identifiers.
16:37:46 [jar_]
q+ to ask how to reconcile http-alongside with compact references (e.g. tables, RDF, ORCID)
16:38:28 [noah]
q- jar_
16:38:41 [johnk]
NM: formally welcomes Rohit Khare as substitute for Raman
16:40:07 [johnk]
JAR: troublesome part is references where you publish both a DOI and an HTTP ref
16:40:35 [johnk]
JAR: RDF is also troublesome - don't usually give a URI and then metadata for use of that URI
16:41:01 [timbl_]
q+ to discuss long res in particular lables on RDF link sgoing out of a dataset e.g. a foaf file.
16:41:16 [johnk]
JAR: lot of pressure to improve the metadata and annotation in scholarly articles
16:41:51 [johnk]
JAR: ORCHID trying to solve the problem of interop between publishers to allow "federated" pub search
16:42:12 [johnk]
q-
16:42:12 [jar_]
s/ORCHID/ORCID/
16:42:15 [tvraman-prime]
tvraman-prime has joined #tagmem
16:42:24 [johnk]
HT: we still need a staged approach
16:42:45 [ht]
In actionable contexts, use the actionable manifestation
16:42:48 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
16:42:52 [noah]
ack next
16:43:03 [noah]
q?
16:43:29 [johnk]
AM: suppose we agree - who are we reaching out to? What are we recommending?
16:43:50 [johnk]
JAR: growing number of groups are confused about this
16:44:00 [johnk]
AM: Should W3C take a very public position about this?
16:44:26 [johnk]
JAR: doesn't necessarily require a big W3C investment
16:44:32 [johnk]
JAR: TAG could make a statement
16:44:57 [johnk]
JAR: NSF, ORCID, others
16:45:25 [johnk]
JAR: a TAG statement could be used to support best practice within these communities
16:45:46 [johnk]
HT: would lead to internal discussions within places like XRI, other communities about such a W3C statement
16:45:55 [noah]
ack next
16:45:56 [Zakim]
noahm, you wanted to ask why the "do HTTP" option was presented so hesitantly
16:47:12 [johnk]
NM: would like to make a very positive statement about the use of HTTP URIs, if we make any such statement
16:48:02 [noah]
ack next
16:48:03 [Zakim]
ht2, you wanted to endorse the status of namespace URIs as rigid designators
16:48:11 [ht]
ack next
16:48:12 [Zakim]
ht3, you wanted to say we could also try to 'fix' 3986
16:48:23 [tvraman-prime]
[er, speaking as Rohit] an aside: "compact persistent identifiers" may be confused with "url shortener" in public PR. TAG isn't taking a position on those, is it?
16:48:49 [noah]
raman-prime: That was mentioned before you turned into TV, I think, but thanks for catching it.
16:48:59 [johnk]
HT: "are URIs really names?"
16:49:42 [johnk]
HT: XHTML NS URI remains in perpetuity because of how it is defined, and how it is used
16:50:25 [johnk]
HT: actually seems to be the case that it is important that you don't need a 200 response from that URI
16:50:37 [johnk]
HT: meaning not tied to the status code when doing a GET
16:51:15 [johnk]
HT: so fix RFC3986 - it's not what you retrieve from it (the URI) that defines what it (URI) means
16:51:36 [johnk]
HT: URI owner says what the URI means
16:52:11 [johnk]
HT: it's the RDF around the use of a URI that determines what it means
16:53:59 [johnk]
TBL: I don't think it's people's websites wrong that is the problem - it's about the problem of the website going away'
16:53:59 [timbl_]
q?
16:54:10 [timbl_]
ack timbl_
16:54:10 [Zakim]
timbl_, you wanted to discuss long res in particular lables on RDF link sgoing out of a dataset e.g. a foaf file.
16:54:27 [ht]
"protecting" domains and being clear about what constitutes a 'normative' definition of the meaning of a URI might be a productive thing to do
16:55:37 [johnk]
HT: you are right Tim - so the proposal to protect some domains should be linked to this, and the link/mapping should be normatively defined
16:56:16 [johnk]
HT: either new TLD or "protect" some set of current TLDs
16:56:30 [ht]
s/current TLDs/current domains/
16:57:30 [johnk]
TBL: good to give not only URI, but also a human-readable label (in FOAF) and perhaps also what class it is
16:57:50 [johnk]
TBL: URI can then be better-interpreted by intelligent things like human beings
16:58:10 [timbl_]
q?
16:59:08 [johnk]
YL: owner of URI is giving a social contract - W3C does already do things around this (DTDs for example)
16:59:54 [johnk]
YL: the fact that you can de-ref a URI by getting the document from local disk is important
17:00:01 [timbl_]
"If you get a 200 then it is authoritative" vs "To know what this means you must look it up and get 200"
17:00:09 [johnk]
HT: "this (local) copy is just fine"
17:01:22 [johnk]
TBL: I can never know what this means without a MIME type
17:01:58 [johnk]
NM: would it be worth a TAG finding discussing the difference between these two statements (200 is authoritative vs. to know what this means you must look it up and get 200)
17:02:01 [johnk]
?
17:03:01 [jar_]
timbl: The subtlety of HTTP authority is one point that gets in the way of 'Just say http:'
17:03:51 [johnk]
HT: "if we deliver something with a 200, then we warrant that it is authoritative"
17:03:51 [jar_]
ht: If you get a 200, then *we warrant* (we the domain owner) that the response is authoritative
17:04:05 [johnk]
ACTION-444
17:04:06 [noah]
ACTION-444?
17:04:06 [trackbot]
ACTION-444 -- Jonathan Rees to draft a white paper on link persistence -- due 2010-10-11 -- PENDINGREVIEW
17:04:06 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/444
17:04:14 [ht]
s/get a 200/get a 200 _from us_/
17:04:33 [johnk]
JAR: I believe this action is met by my memo
17:04:42 [noah]
close ACTION-444
17:04:42 [trackbot]
ACTION-444 Draft a white paper on link persistence closed
17:04:52 [johnk]
ISSUE-50
17:04:56 [johnk]
ISSUE-50?
17:04:56 [trackbot]
ISSUE-50 -- URIs, URNs, "location independent" naming systems and associated registries for naming on the Web -- open
17:04:56 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/50
17:06:21 [johnk]
TBL: (discusses decision tree diagram on board)
17:06:33 [johnk]
TBL: would like a finding that describes the decision tree
17:06:44 [johnk]
TBL: and then add related action items
17:06:59 [johnk]
TBL: keep a map of DNS (archive foundation)
17:08:02 [johnk]
TBL: build a system to route around DNS-related problems
17:10:21 [johnk]
TBL: TAG investigation on actual R&D making machine-readable mapping from schemes to HTTP URIs
17:10:34 [johnk]
TBL: convene an "action group" to move this forward
17:11:13 [johnk]
HT: should move forward from the London workshop - we still need help from the outside to get things done
17:11:33 [noah]
. ACTION: Henry to organize meeting on persistence of references due: 2010-02-28
17:12:06 [noah]
ACTION: Henry to organize meeting on persistence of domains due: 2010-02-28
17:12:06 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-477 - Organize meeting on persistence of domains due: 2010-02-28 [on Henry S. Thompson - due 2010-10-27].
17:12:09 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
17:12:10 [johnk]
HT: 'protect domains' issue is one where we need more people
17:12:12 [DKA]
Image of white board: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/10/PersistenceTreeWhiteBoard.jpg
17:13:10 [johnk]
HT: other action - some willingness to make a policy statement, so let's make a TAG statement endorsed by others
17:13:50 [johnk]
JAR: who do we want to endorse such a statement?
17:17:36 [johnk]
HT: (adds statement to board - "use actionable HTTP manifestations of non-natively actionable URIs in actionable contexts")
17:17:55 [noah]
. ACTION: Jonathan to prepare a first draft of a finding on persistence of references, to be based on decision tree from Oct. F2F
17:17:56 [johnk]
HT: this is more than defining the mapping
17:18:05 [johnk]
HT: requires also performing the mapping
17:19:18 [noah]
ACTION: Jonathan to prepare a first draft of a finding on persistence of references, to be based on decision tree from Oct. F2F Due: 2010-01-31
17:19:18 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-478 - Prepare a first draft of a finding on persistence of references, to be based on decision tree from Oct. F2F Due: 2010-01-31 [on Jonathan Rees - due 2010-10-27].
17:19:30 [johnk]
NM: scheduling choices:
17:19:56 [johnk]
NM: propose we take a 15 min break, and then start up with web apps
17:20:23 [johnk]
ADJOURNED
17:41:53 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
17:42:29 [johnk]
johnk has joined #tagmem
17:43:08 [johnk]
Topic: Web Apps Architecture
17:43:41 [johnk]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/10/19-agenda#WebApps
17:44:11 [johnk]
NM: this session should talk about "what are we doing here"
17:47:24 [johnk]
NM: switching to do privacy first
17:47:32 [johnk]
Topic: Privacy
17:48:03 [johnk]
NM: workshop coming up in December on this topic: http://www.iab.org/about/workshops/privacy/
17:49:18 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to Ping Thomas again on Dec. Privacy workshop
17:49:18 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-479 - Ping Thomas again on Dec. Privacy workshop [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2010-10-27].
17:49:34 [johnk]
DKA: I think we should have a focussed discussion about Evercookie
17:49:51 [johnk]
ACTION-460?
17:49:51 [trackbot]
ACTION-460 -- Daniel Appelquist to coordinate with IAB regarding next steps on privacy policy -- due 2010-10-12 -- OPEN
17:49:51 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/460
17:50:17 [Ashok]
q+
17:50:37 [johnk]
DKA: talked to organizers of workshop about relation between TAG and this workshop
17:51:05 [johnk]
DKA: this is an ongoing thing - we need collaboration between TAG and IAB
17:51:14 [johnk]
DKA: first thing is this workshop
17:51:46 [noah]
ACTION-460 Due 2011-01-20
17:51:46 [trackbot]
ACTION-460 Coordinate with IAB regarding next steps on privacy policy due date now 2011-01-20
17:52:07 [noah]
ack next
17:52:14 [johnk]
q+
17:52:47 [johnk]
AM: there was a privacy workshop last month? (link?)
17:53:01 [noah]
AM: There was a report by Rigo from the previous workshop
17:53:30 [DKA]
Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2010/policy-ws/agenda.html
17:53:51 [DKA]
s/Agenda/Privacy Workshop Agnda/
17:54:17 [DKA]
Nick Doty's paper: http://www.w3.org/2010/policy-ws/papers/03-Doty-Wilde-Berkeley.pdf
17:54:45 [noah]
ack next
17:55:05 [noah]
JK: Dan, are you representing the TAG at the IAB workshop?
17:55:08 [noah]
DKA: Won't be there.
17:55:17 [noah]
DKA: I'm on the PC, but won't be there.
17:56:28 [DKA]
The IAB workshop is Wednesday, December 8 Thursday, December 9
17:57:22 [noah]
JK: Is this our first chance to follow up with IAB et. al on privacy work?
17:57:47 [noah]
DKA: Well, it's not a manifestation of a formal plan to coordinate, except insofar as I, a TAG member, am on the program committee
17:59:10 [johnk]
NM: should we list some goals for privacy, or just put this as a background issue?
17:59:32 [noah]
s/goals for/goals for TAG work on/
17:59:32 [johnk]
DKA: evercookie makes the association between HTML5 and a lack of privacy
18:00:04 [johnk]
DKA: my view is that we should push back on this issue generally-speaking
18:00:21 [noah]
q+ to say I'd like to think about deeper implications of evercookies
18:00:51 [johnk]
DKA: it behooves us to associate HTML technologies with an *increase* in privacy
18:01:07 [johnk]
DKA: push people to improve privacy in specific ways
18:01:19 [Ashok]
q+
18:01:43 [johnk]
DKA: evercookie is about exploiting the cracks in system boundaries
18:01:47 [noah]
ack next
18:01:48 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to say I'd like to think about deeper implications of evercookies
18:02:52 [johnk]
NM: I'd like to look at the deeper issue exposed by evercookie - even if you do something good with the formally-defined storage mechanisms available...
18:03:12 [johnk]
NM: have we created a system where we cannot ever *really* protect you?
18:03:27 [johnk]
NM: here is what it means, and here the tradeoffs...
18:03:46 [noah]
ack next
18:03:50 [johnk]
NM: here are the all the things one can do to mitigate privacy problems on the Web
18:04:49 [johnk]
AM: cient-side storage work says that you "ought to be able to delete cookies in any way necessary"
18:05:28 [johnk]
AM: proposal was made that this should be supported by vendors but there was pushback
18:06:18 [johnk]
(see link: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Aug/0030.html)
18:06:55 [noah]
q?
18:07:27 [johnk]
q+ to note sympathy with Noah's opinion
18:08:24 [johnk]
DKA: (writes a list of "privacy invasive" techniques used in evercookie work on board)
18:08:43 [johnk]
DKA: "we can't fix it because it's an arms race" position
18:09:50 [johnk]
list comes from the evercookie paper - http://samy.pl/evercookie/
18:11:15 [noah]
q?
18:11:37 [Ashok]
q+
18:11:46 [noah]
JK: I have a lot of sympathy with Noah's view here
18:11:53 [noah]
Hmm. Noah sees he wasn't scribed.
18:12:19 [noah]
Ah, was earlier.
18:12:45 [Ashok]
Cookie storage mechanisms:
18:12:49 [noah]
JK: Yes, we can deal explicitly with some of the bits n pieces, but I think it's important to acknowledge that we are likely to be leaving holes.
18:12:51 [Ashok]
- HTTP Cookies - Local Storage Objects (Local Storage Objects) - Cookies in RGB values using canvas to read values back out - Storing coolies in Web history - HTML5 Session Storage - HTML Global Storage - HTML SQL Storage - CSS Storing visited state - DOM Form fillin
18:13:38 [noah]
DKA: That's a whole topic that's up for debate. I'm receptive/positive on CDT proposal, which are about storing and carrying metadata about privacy with data as it moves through the system. BUT: this isn't about that.
18:13:41 [noah]
q?
18:13:44 [noah]
ack next
18:13:45 [Zakim]
johnk, you wanted to note sympathy with Noah's opinion
18:13:55 [noah]
ack next
18:13:59 [noah]
q+ rohit
18:14:18 [noah]
q+ to repeat myself
18:14:20 [johnk]
AM: there are these 3rd party browser plugins which stop scripts (for example)
18:14:35 [johnk]
AM: they also decrease functionality...
18:15:36 [johnk]
NM: some of this is about what you visit, not what you publish
18:15:43 [noah]
ack next
18:16:18 [johnk]
RK: "these 4200 websites are all owned by Viacom" (on same-origin policy)
18:16:38 [johnk]
RK: worry about the effect of trying to make a TAG policy statement about something still so unsettled
18:16:42 [DKA]
q+
18:16:47 [noah]
ack next
18:16:48 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to repeat myself
18:17:01 [timbl_]
q+
18:17:28 [johnk]
RK: alternative might be to make specific statements like "add a privacy considerations section to specs"
18:18:28 [johnk]
NM: could make statement saying "when you use the Web, this is what is possible" - "you should assume that your tracks on the Web will be followable and trackable"
18:18:58 [johnk]
NM: and/or "these things become urgent good practice in order to prevent privacy problems"
18:19:24 [DKA]
For example, we could say about this: "techniques [evercookie] have been developed to circumvent users' privacy preferences through exploitation of cracks 'between' w3c standards (canvas, web storage, css, etc...). The specific exploits are x, y, z. We recommend that a, b, c working groups address these issues and work with the TAG to ensure that these resolutions mesh with eachother to help protect user privacy."
18:19:35 [johnk]
RK: perfectly reasonable for TAG to say "these things have issues"
18:19:48 [noah]
q?
18:19:51 [noah]
ack next
18:19:59 [noah]
s/trackable/correlateable/
18:20:05 [johnk]
DKA: would not want the TAG to say "this is a solution to this or that"
18:21:03 [johnk]
DKA: make a recommendation to W3C WGs that they attempt to address specific issues exposed by (for example) evercookie
18:21:20 [noah]
And my concern is: is the list DKA gives likely to be sufficiently bounded, or slowly changing, that we can achieve having "the resolutions mesh with each other to help protect.." I'm not convinced we aren't engaged in false advertising if we promise that.
18:21:22 [noah]
q?
18:21:25 [noah]
ack next
18:21:57 [johnk]
TBL: reasonable for the TAG to look at this...
18:22:25 [Yves]
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/77/slides/plenaryt-5.pdf
18:22:47 [johnk]
TBL: will there be social pressure on the community to fix this (rather than technical solutions)?
18:22:58 [johnk]
TBL: such pressure may lead to technology that helps
18:23:38 [DKA]
Rohit said: "unintended persistent data storage with lack of user control"
18:23:41 [noah]
q?
18:24:12 [johnk]
RK: unintended persistence (uncontrollable) data storage with lack of user control
18:25:00 [johnk]
NM: will you (a user) be able in general to distinguish the items which you need to control?
18:25:15 [DKA]
q+
18:25:47 [johnk]
NM: I can delete my entire local email storage in order to prevent tracking through that, but this seems extreme
18:26:42 [johnk]
NM: have the TAG give a "health warning"?
18:27:19 [johnk]
RK: "the following pieces of data are possibly persistent and may be used to track a user across the Web"?
18:27:28 [noah]
q?
18:27:33 [noah]
ack next
18:27:41 [johnk]
RK: here's what a UA may persist
18:28:42 [johnk]
DKA: we're not saying that there is any guarantee of user privacy, but we should take a stance on this situation
18:28:52 [johnk]
NM: don't want this to be "false advertising"
18:29:01 [tvraman-prime]
[speaking as Rohit again, sorry] Would love to be able to point developers and advocates at a document that says "A Web user agent may persist user data in the following ways, some of which are clearly documented, any of which may be desirable or undesirable"
18:30:48 [johnk]
TBL: can you build a sandboxing technical solution?
18:31:21 [johnk]
HT: I have such a sandboxing solution that filters all outgoing traffic and prevents information from leaving the machine
18:31:29 [tvraman-prime]
Mozilla has a plan to stop CSS History sniffing -- do they need TAG help? http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2010/03/31/plugging-the-css-history-leak/
18:31:42 [johnk]
NM: how can you possibly filter *everything*?
18:32:30 [tvraman-prime]
DKA cited: https://panopticlick.eff.org/
18:32:44 [ht]
The tool I'm referring to is http://sandboxie.com/
18:33:13 [johnk]
JAR: Safari private browsing deals with the evercookie script
18:33:54 [johnk]
YL: can taint data based on its origin
18:34:07 [johnk]
YL: and put policy around that...
18:35:38 [johnk]
q+
18:35:40 [ht]
Hmm, seems I was over-optimistic -- sandboxie protects you across sessions, but not, maybe, within a session
18:36:07 [noah]
q?
18:36:13 [noah]
q+ ashok
18:37:28 [jar_]
q+ to think aloud about privacy law and policy disclosure statements - maybe apply idea to browsers?
18:38:14 [johnk]
JK: mentions sandboxing work in Chromium, Webkit2 et al
18:38:19 [johnk]
q?
18:38:21 [johnk]
ack next
18:38:25 [noah]
ack next
18:39:23 [noah]
q?
18:39:30 [noah]
ack next
18:39:31 [Zakim]
jar_, you wanted to think aloud about privacy law and policy disclosure statements - maybe apply idea to browsers?
18:39:57 [masinter`]
masinter` has joined #tagmem
18:40:39 [johnk]
JAR: thinking of paper privacy statement information (as mandated in HIPAA, other law for example)
18:40:49 [timbl_]
q+
18:40:58 [johnk]
JAR: what would happen if you put such privacy statements in UAs?
18:41:00 [masinter`]
but notification doesn't really help anyone ....
18:41:10 [johnk]
JAR: privacy disclosure statements
18:41:20 [noah]
q+
18:41:46 [DKA]
q+
18:41:52 [DKA]
q-
18:42:19 [noah]
ack next
18:42:28 [DKA]
q+
18:42:30 [johnk]
RK: wary of making statements which might make software "accountable"
18:42:32 [noah]
q-
18:42:32 [DKA]
q-
18:42:45 [DKA]
q+ to suggest we not try to re-invent p3p
18:42:47 [masinter`]
isn't "privacy" is a cover for several other things, and looking at those things will give better analysis? (don't want to interrupt, having missed morning)
18:42:47 [noah]
q?
18:43:07 [johnk]
TBL: lot of interest in making such statements (as noted in previous workshop)
18:43:23 [johnk]
TBL: privacy statements are not kept in sync
18:43:26 [masinter`]
TBL: talk about "what was wrong with P3P"
18:43:37 [jar_]
That doesn't work.... if the browser vendor made a privacy policy statement, then they can be held to the statement, and held accountable... would only happen if compelled to... same issue as a software warrantee, would never happen.
18:43:48 [jar_]
s/can be/could be/
18:44:13 [johnk]
TBL: you can put anything in an HTTP header (no accountability)
18:44:17 [DKA]
to be clear: I am not suggesting that the TAG can solve the user privacy issue (whatever that may be).
18:44:28 [johnk]
TBL: but if you sign something you can be legally held accountable
18:44:31 [noah]
q?
18:45:11 [noah]
ack next
18:45:13 [Zakim]
DKA, you wanted to suggest we not try to re-invent p3p
18:45:30 [noah]
q+ to try to focus on goals and next steps
18:45:45 [johnk]
DKA: suggest we don't try and fix the big issue of user privacy
18:46:08 [timbl_]
NO s/ou can put anything in an HTTP header (no accountability)/It is not true that you can put anything in a header withoyt accountabilty for it/
18:46:20 [timbl_]
s/You can put anything in an HTTP header (no accountability)/It is not true that you can put anything in a header withoyt accountabilty for it/
18:46:22 [masinter`]
q+ to refine DKA words
18:46:26 [johnk]
(TVR joins)
18:46:47 [johnk]
DKA: should point out that this is an architectural issue
18:47:45 [johnk]
RK: retrievable privacy policies (such as P3P) are not kept up to date - no industry around that
18:47:53 [noah]
ack next
18:47:54 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to try to focus on goals and next steps
18:48:23 [masinter`]
I'm very skeptical that privacy policies do anything to actually address privacy requirements, and that this "received wisdom" should be questioned, rather than TAG jumping into it
18:48:36 [Ashok]
q+
18:48:57 [johnk]
NM: what should we do, concretely, about this? Concrete steps please
18:49:01 [noah]
ack next
18:49:03 [Zakim]
masinter`, you wanted to refine DKA words
18:49:47 [DKA]
reposting for larry: mple, we could say about this: "techniques [evercookie] have been developed to circumvent users' privacy preferences through exploitation of cracks 'between' w3c standards (canvas, web storage, css, etc...). The specific exploits are x, y, z. We recommend that a, b, c working groups address these issues and work with the TAG to ensure that these resolutions mesh with eachother to help protect user privacy."
18:50:20 [johnk]
LM: I'm sceptical about going down this road
18:50:38 [noah]
NM: Specifically, I'd like people to propose: 1) what should be the goals of the TAG's further work in this area be and 2) what, therefore, are the concrete steps we should take to achieve those goals
18:50:39 [johnk]
DKA: specifically talking about evercookie
18:50:52 [tvraman-prime_]
tvraman-prime_ has joined #tagmem
18:51:16 [johnk]
LM: user is trying to accomplish something - clearing the data doesn't necessarily do that
18:52:09 [johnk]
LM: reluctant for the TAG to endorse a technical solution that we don not think actually solves this problem
18:52:49 [masinter`]
main concern is that "solutions" should actually be practical, and that architectural
18:53:29 [johnk]
q+ to note that we should not stand in the way of evercookie of other things which dramatically highlight these issues
18:56:13 [johnk]
NM: what can we do at this technical (very low-level) level to have a real world effect on something less technical (user privacy)?
18:56:23 [DKA]
q+
18:56:32 [johnk]
NM: if result is that much less information is leaked then great
18:56:49 [johnk]
NM: ... but if not, should we really say something?
18:59:36 [johnk]
q?
19:00:23 [masinter`]
q?
19:00:59 [noah]
ack next
19:01:20 [johnk]
AM: idea of a "health warning" is reasonable and a good idea
19:01:43 [DKA]
The word on the street: New Web Code [HTML5] Draws Concern Over Privacy Risks : http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/11/business/media/11privacy.html
19:02:10 [johnk]
AM: Dan mentioned these things come from different W3C WGs - but this is NOT only a W3C issue
19:02:39 [noah]
q?
19:02:46 [johnk]
AM: if you say "this tech has a problem" but they will say "this work is also useful"
19:02:48 [noah]
ack next
19:02:49 [Zakim]
johnk, you wanted to note that we should not stand in the way of evercookie of other things which dramatically highlight these issues
19:03:44 [masinter`]
q+ to suggest privacy is like accessibility -- requires a bigger effort, need to focus on satisfying real needs
19:03:47 [noah]
JK: The publicity from things like Evercookie is more effective than anything we could do; therefore we should do nothing to stand in the way, and leave the public relations to efforts like that.
19:03:50 [raman]
lunch beckons
19:04:08 [noah]
Lunch is on the agenda for 12:15 -- Rohit said that would be OK. Is that a problem after all?
19:04:25 [jar_]
q+ to note option of waiting for last call, then review for our concerns
19:05:12 [johnk]
ADJOURN
19:49:55 [masinter`]
masinter` has joined #tagmem
19:50:03 [masinter`]
q?
19:50:09 [masinter`]
q-
19:51:04 [DKA]
DKA has joined #tagmem
19:51:29 [tvraman-prime]
tvraman-prime has joined #tagmem
19:55:39 [masinter`]
(a) privacy & security cut across protocol layers
20:00:59 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
20:06:28 [jar_]
jar_ has joined #tagmem
20:06:33 [masinter`]
scribe: Larry Masinter
20:06:37 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
20:06:54 [masinter`]
zakim, who's here?
20:06:54 [Zakim]
TAG_f2f()11:30AM has not yet started, masinter`
20:06:55 [Zakim]
On IRC I see timbl, jar_, noah, DKA, masinter`, Zakim, RRSAgent, raman, jar, trackbot, Yves
20:07:25 [noah]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/10/19-agenda.html
20:07:28 [Larry]
scribenick: Larry
20:08:07 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
20:09:12 [Larry]
(discussion of agenda)
20:10:32 [Larry]
topics XML/HTML integration, action-476, admin session, jaffee gouls, action-448, web app architecture
20:11:48 [Larry]
nm: we haven't made enough progress on webarch, do you really believe the goal that we're going to get organized
20:11:57 [Larry]
q+
20:12:12 [noah]
q- DKA
20:12:21 [noah]
q- jar_
20:12:28 [johnk]
johnk has joined #tagmem
20:12:30 [johnk]
q?
20:13:10 [noah]
q- Larry
20:13:10 [Ashok]
q+
20:14:54 [Larry]
larry: I think we're making good progress on this long-term goal, but we are giving 5 things 20% service
20:15:05 [Larry]
nm: not scaling, people aren't vesting enough
20:15:51 [Larry]
raman: we need to leverage the external community better, the 9 of us don't know enough, and there's going to be turnover. This is my last tag meeting, i am not going to be a TAG candidate.
20:16:41 [Larry]
raman: the tag has been around for 9 years, there are people who have valuable input
20:17:02 [Larry]
(discussion of individuals, former tag members, who have valuable contributions, have helped, etc.)
20:17:15 [noah]
ack next
20:17:32 [Larry]
nm: raman invited to next TAG meeting
20:18:16 [jar_]
rrsagent, pointer
20:18:16 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2010/10/20-tagmem-irc#T20-18-16
20:19:15 [Larry]
raman: i hope to be able to contribute to the TAG in the future; continuing, that level of involvement should be encouraged
20:19:37 [johnk]
q+ to mention one technique for getting real stuff done
20:19:47 [Larry]
ashok: we have a table of contents, ask people to write sections of that. Noah: we did that. Ashok took storage.
20:20:35 [jar_]
q?
20:20:41 [Larry]
ashok: Larry's email was useful, make be can expand that
20:20:44 [noah]
q?
20:20:46 [noah]
ack next
20:20:48 [Zakim]
johnk, you wanted to mention one technique for getting real stuff done
20:20:59 [jar_]
q+ to consider utility of threat model
20:21:56 [Larry]
johnk: as part of my action items on this, i thought of 3 examples of new interaction modes.... one thing that I found when doing that work, related to jonathan's work... I'm still unsure about what exactly is new here. The mechanism by which individuals write something and others critique it, isn't going to get the job done.
20:22:33 [Larry]
johnk: (discussing how he gets security threat analysis written)
20:23:28 [Larry]
q+ to suggest more interim publications of draft TAG documents for community review, rather than waiting for TAG to be "done"
20:24:02 [Larry]
nm: what we've been missing has been what the tag wants to say
20:24:50 [Larry]
raman: that's top down, doesn't work. the whole model of individuals writing & reviewing doesn't scale, it's still only 9 people
20:25:24 [Larry]
nm: we only occasionally got comments, the blog has been useful but not given the next level
20:25:35 [noah]
q?
20:25:40 [noah]
ack next
20:25:42 [Zakim]
jar_, you wanted to consider utility of threat model
20:25:57 [johnk]
q+ to advocate a "blunt instrument" approach
20:27:25 [noah]
q+ to talk about threats
20:27:26 [Larry]
jar: this "web application" things has been bothering me because it seems amorphous, but nobody seems what it good it will do. I've been thinking about threat models as a perspective. What are in danger of losing? The web architecture document had some of that. Because it looked like it was under siege, and we were defending it. Just suggesting as a heuristic.
20:27:37 [timbl]
q+
20:27:58 [noah]
ack next
20:28:00 [Zakim]
Larry, you wanted to suggest more interim publications of draft TAG documents for community review, rather than waiting for TAG to be "done"
20:28:01 [Larry]
jar: we talk about the W3C mission and good properties and ways in which the web can be made better -- if you think of it as a defense rather than a scholary survey, that might help.
20:28:34 [noah]
LM: I want to advocate more frequent publication of smaller, interim documents, that we're not done with, for public comment.
20:29:10 [raman]
raman has left #tagmem
20:29:16 [noah]
LM: There's an early stage where you get a first level of comments, we can have an effect on the community even from the interim state
20:29:29 [raman]
raman has joined #tagmem
20:29:41 [noah]
LM: We could have a goal of having one blog entry a week.
20:29:50 [jar_]
LM: suggest documents that are not just an individual's musings, but a report on the TAG's current thinking on the topic
20:30:03 [noah]
q+ raman
20:30:09 [noah]
q- raman
20:31:07 [noah]
ack next
20:31:09 [Zakim]
johnk, you wanted to advocate a "blunt instrument" approach
20:31:13 [noah]
ack next
20:31:14 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to talk about threats
20:32:29 [Larry]
noah: i liked what JAR said about threats -- first webarch doc was a "hey wake up". That's what I assumed what we were doing. Personally, I have a list of threats that have come up in context.... "How far do the good characteristics of the REST model stick around when you have javascript munging URIs"
20:33:10 [Larry]
q+
20:35:14 [Larry]
raman: minutes 10 years ago were a way of engaging the community; now the minutes aren't sufficient
20:35:17 [noah]
ack next
20:35:26 [Larry]
q+ to talk about tweeting too
20:35:37 [noah]
ack next
20:35:39 [Zakim]
Larry, you wanted to talk about tweeting too
20:36:41 [Larry]
Larry: also I tweeted and got re-tweeted, which i thought was some interesting feedback
20:37:21 [noah]
NM: I think that happened not primarily because you wrote a blog entry as opposed to TAG Finding draft; you were retweeted because what you wrote was well crafted, and thoughtful.
20:37:26 [noah]
q?
20:38:49 [DKA]
q+ to support John's "just do it" approach.
20:39:12 [Larry]
q+ to suggest concrete steps to do more and publicize what we've done
20:39:27 [Larry]
raman: why haven't we done it?
20:39:52 [Larry]
johnk: lack of time to do focused work of that much length .... schedule time to do work, do writing in meeting
20:40:12 [Larry]
nm: 8 people per hour working on commas
20:41:05 [noah]
q+ to talk about time
20:41:19 [Larry]
(discussion about how to organizing writing sessions)
20:42:00 [Larry]
nm: next f2f is in 3 months, is this something we can do on phone?
20:42:33 [Larry]
raman: this is something we did in xforms -- kept zakim open, everyone sat in their location and worked on their documents, did this for 8 hours
20:42:56 [Larry]
raman: everyone sitting in their own environment doing the writing, everyone else committed to reviewing immediately
20:43:15 [noah]
ack next
20:43:17 [Zakim]
DKA, you wanted to support John's "just do it" approach.
20:43:35 [noah]
ack next
20:43:37 [Zakim]
Larry, you wanted to suggest concrete steps to do more and publicize what we've done
20:43:49 [Larry]
dka: has many of the same issues, would help. Timezones do crop up
20:44:28 [Larry]
raman: email & wait for review is completely asynchronous, f2f is completely synchronous, i'm suggesting something in between
20:44:52 [Larry]
DKA: if you organize it enough, you can do it early morning, late evening
20:45:00 [johnk]
johnk has joined #tagmem
20:45:09 [noah]
LM: Offers to host a session on the MIME and the Web document
20:45:46 [noah]
TVR: 3 hours is good
20:45:49 [noah]
ack next
20:45:51 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to talk about time
20:47:03 [Larry]
nm: scheduling a 3-hour session before there's a first draft is questionable
20:47:23 [Larry]
nm: people have to think about the amount of time they have on time work.
20:48:16 [Larry]
nm: the process on webarch was painful, half-time for 6 months. people used to do things on that scale, seeing less of it.
20:48:50 [Larry]
nm: the format is only a piece of the puzzle, people need to make a commitment
20:49:25 [johnk]
q+
20:49:39 [noah]
ack next
20:50:23 [johnk]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Oct/0061.html
20:51:52 [Larry]
I'd propose http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Oct/0064.html as an introduciton to the WebApps chapter of WebArch
20:52:45 [Larry]
q+ to point out that we could take the emails on the mailing list and use them in documents.
20:52:48 [noah]
q?
20:53:34 [Larry]
johnk: Roy Fielding's description, pointer to CREST was an interesting perspective
20:53:36 [noah]
ack next
20:53:38 [Zakim]
Larry, you wanted to point out that we could take the emails on the mailing list and use them in documents.
20:54:19 [noah]
q+ to talk about email
20:54:22 [johnk]
LM: need to pull out the really important statements from some of these email threads
20:54:58 [noah]
ack next
20:55:00 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to talk about email
20:55:35 [Larry]
nm: we used to have a tradition that went beyond that, where poeple were encouraged in email to express their opinions by expressed new text in a document... if you don't like what i said, put it in a form you think would work
20:56:08 [Larry]
nm: to go back to the particular several efforts on which we have actions... now that i've heard this, i know what i want to do
20:57:40 [Larry]
ht: I want to take a 'glass half full' view... people who have been working have been making progress. I would like to 'spin' what we're getting toward as "let's put all of our effort toward helping the people who are making progress". We are much closer to the event horizon with webapps than we were when we started webarch
20:58:40 [Larry]
nm: no one is saying "let's stop working on webarch", various flavors "glass is half full, progress we've made isn't so bad, let's team up to move more effectively"
20:59:01 [Larry]
q?
20:59:26 [Larry]
q+
21:01:31 [Larry]
(discussion of Raman/Ashok on client side state, client side storage)
21:02:20 [noah]
ACTION-430?
21:02:20 [trackbot]
ACTION-430 -- Ashok Malhotra to propose a plan for his contributions to section 5: Client-side state -- due 2010-09-09 -- OPEN
21:02:20 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/430
21:02:43 [Larry]
raman: ashok, would you take the edit token on hash-in-URL document
21:02:52 [Larry]
ashok: BBC situation
21:02:58 [DKA]
q+ to wonder if we need another meta-level note on webapps arch - could just collect discussion on action-434...
21:04:17 [Larry]
raman: The BBC conversation -- there were parts of BBC site that were obfuscated because they didn't want their content scraped and reused.
21:04:29 [Larry]
raman: the URL of the content stream was obfuscated
21:05:04 [noah]
ACTION-430?
21:05:04 [trackbot]
ACTION-430 -- Ashok Malhotra to propose a plan for his contributions to section 5: Client-side state -- due 2010-09-09 -- OPEN
21:05:04 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/430
21:05:55 [noah]
ack next
21:05:59 [Larry]
ashok: we're trying to create one document so we can all discuss
21:06:24 [noah]
LM: I still want to get things out to the community earlier through blogs, etc.
21:06:31 [noah]
NM: Not the www-tag list?
21:06:57 [noah]
LM: Not good enough. Too hard for people to find what they need.
21:07:03 [noah]
q+ to talk about www-tag
21:08:20 [Larry]
ht: i disagree, most nobody has enough time. I disagree -- it sounds like you're asking for more things to be done
21:08:56 [noah]
ack next
21:08:57 [Zakim]
DKA, you wanted to wonder if we need another meta-level note on webapps arch - could just collect discussion on action-434...
21:09:05 [Larry]
ht: if webapps architecture is our ongoing goal, writing deliverable prose should be our focus
21:09:11 [timbl]
q+ to ask whethre it should be or main goal
21:09:44 [Larry]
dka: there's another document, around action-434
21:09:46 [Larry]
action-434?
21:09:46 [trackbot]
ACTION-434 -- Daniel Appelquist to prepare discussion of structure of what we want to do about web apps architecture... -- due 2010-10-18 -- OPEN
21:09:46 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/434
21:10:54 [DKA]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Oct/0068.html
21:12:01 [Larry]
nm: I don't know if it's useful to go top down
21:12:11 [Larry]
nm: maybe we could go bottom up
21:12:21 [Larry]
q?
21:12:35 [Larry]
q+ to point out that top down and bottom up are not exclusive but are coordinated
21:14:06 [Larry]
http://www.amazon.com/Scrolling-Forward-Making-Documents-Digital/dp/1559705531
21:15:08 [Larry]
nm: Yves, how many people subscribe to www-tag?
21:15:34 [Larry]
Yves: 240 subscribers
21:15:58 [noah]
q?
21:16:01 [noah]
ack next
21:16:02 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to talk about www-tag
21:16:03 [noah]
ack next
21:16:08 [Zakim]
timbl, you wanted to ask whethre it should be or main goal
21:17:38 [Larry]
timbl: what should be the top things the TAG is working on?
21:18:16 [Larry]
timbl: Is WebApps an area where we have enough coherent to say yet? The story on persistence is importance?
21:18:37 [Larry]
(discussion of TAG report at TPAC)
21:19:45 [noah]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/sum07.html#html
21:19:58 [noah]
That's the TAG's July report on HTML 5 progress/impact:http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/sum07.html#html
21:21:08 [Larry]
q?
21:21:33 [noah]
q?
21:21:38 [noah]
ack next
21:21:40 [Zakim]
Larry, you wanted to point out that top down and bottom up are not exclusive but are coordinated
21:23:00 [noah]
LM: I believe we can go top down and bottom up
21:25:19 [Larry]
raman: think the conversation has been productive
21:25:41 [Larry]
noah: (wrap up discussion)
21:26:38 [Larry]
noah: big priorities vs. little priorities. balance top down & bottom up. thoughts about how to publish. go through actions: for each of them, are we happy with what's happening next?
21:27:32 [Larry]
ashok: on the client side state & storage: I will revise the documents based on comments. I would then like a telcon, that's the one i'd like to start on.
21:28:14 [Larry]
noah: how about one at a time to pick up on these, ask the tag at a whole, look at the writing, and then try to do at least one well. Try to get everyone's priorities set.
21:28:58 [Larry]
ashok: there was another idea here to write an intro based on some email?
21:31:40 [noah]
ACTION: Appelquist to draft overview document framing Web applications as opposed to traditional Web of documents Due: 2010-11-01
21:31:40 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-480 - Draft overview document framing Web applications as opposed to traditional Web of documents Due: 2010-11-01 [on Daniel Appelquist - due 2010-10-27].
21:32:28 [noah]
ACTION-430?
21:32:28 [trackbot]
ACTION-430 -- Ashok Malhotra to propose a plan for his contributions to section 5: Client-side state -- due 2010-09-09 -- OPEN
21:32:28 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/430
21:32:35 [noah]
close ACTION-430
21:32:35 [trackbot]
ACTION-430 Propose a plan for his contributions to section 5: Client-side state closed
21:33:33 [noah]
ACTION: Ashok to update client-side state document with help from Raman Due: 2010-11-30
21:33:33 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-481 - Update client-side state document with help from Raman Due: 2010-11-30 [on Ashok Malhotra - due 2010-10-27].
21:34:45 [noah]
ACTION: Ashok to write a draft on client-side storage with help from DanA Due: 2010-11-30
21:34:45 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-482 - Write a draft on client-side storage with help from DanA Due: 2010-11-30 [on Ashok Malhotra - due 2010-10-27].
21:56:11 [timbl]
http://jeffersonsmoose.org/
21:57:36 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
21:57:48 [masinter`]
masinter` has joined #tagmem
21:58:01 [masinter`]
http://jeffersonsmoose.org/
22:00:11 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
22:00:47 [masinter`]
return from break
22:01:04 [masinter`]
topic: administrative
22:01:22 [masinter`]
(previous topic was Web Application Architecture: Overview)
22:01:29 [masinter`]
topic: Administative Issues
22:01:41 [masinter`]
s/stative/strative/
22:01:56 [noah]
RESOLUTION: Minutes of 7 October 2010 are approved
22:02:49 [masinter`]
nm: TPAC logistics. TPAC is in a week and a half. Yves, Dan, Ashok, Noah, maybe Larry
22:02:53 [timbl]
jar, http://www.w3.org/2010/roadmap/tag-goals.svg
22:03:21 [masinter`]
nm: and Tim (from show of hands)
22:04:14 [masinter`]
(discussion on whether we're meeting Friday morning)
22:04:22 [masinter`]
raman: will be there Tuesday & Thursday
22:05:15 [masinter`]
Yves: 2 PM Thursday meeting with Alexi
22:05:32 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to inform TAG of TPAC meeting schedule
22:05:33 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-483 - Inform TAG of TPAC meeting schedule [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2010-10-27].
22:06:45 [masinter`]
nm: what do you want on the agenda? only 1 week between this meeting and there. We don't have to meet if there's nothing left to do.
22:09:10 [masinter`]
ashok: typically, we also visit with certain working groups?
22:10:31 [masinter`]
ashok: should tag try to meet with webapps, geolocation, device APIs?
22:14:35 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
22:17:53 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to alert chairs, ac-forum, www-tag of TAG availability for Monday session at TPAC
22:17:53 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-484 - Alert chairs, ac-forum, www-tag of TAG availability for Monday session at TPAC [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2010-10-27].
22:21:54 [masinter`]
nm: most important is getting good nominees
22:22:25 [masinter`]
nm: TPAC is a good time to solicit new nominations
22:23:35 [masinter`]
nm: do not need to be W3C affiliated to run for TAG
22:25:14 [masinter`]
next topic: future meetings
22:31:32 [masinter`]
(discussion of scheduling of meetings, 5 month gap between meetings? )
22:33:29 [masinter`]
nm: look around mid-feb, 4 weeks after election is announced, so that newly elected member(s)
22:35:57 [masinter`]
(discussion of meeting in France)
22:42:15 [Ashok]
(discussion of meeting in Cambridge)
22:44:04 [masinter`]
TPAC meeting proposal Feb 8-10 in Cambridge (Yves unlikely to be available)
22:44:24 [masinter`]
(checking calendars)
22:45:27 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to have Amy reserve rooms for TAG F2F Feb 8-10 2011
22:45:27 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-485 - Have Amy reserve rooms for TAG F2F Feb 8-10 2011 [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2010-10-27].
22:45:40 [jar_]
https://www.csail.mit.edu/mrbs/
22:48:47 [DKA]
DKA has joined #tagmem
22:52:21 [masinter`]
JAR: Suggest changing "We do not state a preference for one of these approaches over the other." to "We were not agreed as to which of these approaches was better."
22:52:21 [masinter`]
22:53:11 [masinter`]
topic: JAR's message re 3023bis
22:54:38 [jar_]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2010Oct/0059.html
22:56:09 [masinter`]
ht: s/Xpointer/XPointer
22:56:14 [masinter`]
yves: cc norm
22:56:31 [masinter`]
ht: s/heated discussion/discussion
22:58:14 [masinter`]
noah, yves: thought 2. was going to give advice on future media type registrations
22:58:53 [timbl]
q+ to ..
23:00:26 [timbl]
Explicitly "grandfather" application/rdf+xml by exempting it from
23:00:27 [timbl]
generic processing, as a special case. That is, although
23:00:27 [timbl]
application/rdf+xml contains the "+xml" morpheme, point out that the referent of URI with fragment identifier are that defined by the RDF/XML specifications.
23:01:07 [masinter`]
(discussion of wording as being edited)
23:01:09 [noah]
Proposed sentence ahead of start of option #2:
23:01:09 [noah]
Indicate that media type registrations for media types of the form application/___+xml MUST/SHOULD NOT provide definitions for fragment identifiers that would cause any particular such identifier to resolve differently than per the generic rules.
23:02:27 [DKA]
DKA has joined #tagmem
23:02:27 [masinter`]
q?
23:04:54 [masinter`]
q+
23:05:37 [jar_]
Timbl's formulation of what in IRC was #4 and in email is #2: When the mime type is *+xml, then the semantics of fragment identifiers are defined by the xpointer specification, except for application/rdf+xml where they are defined by the RDF specs.
23:06:16 [timbl]
RRSAgent, pointer?
23:06:16 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2010/10/20-tagmem-irc#T23-06-16
23:08:14 [masinter`]
s/defined by the xpointer/defined to be interpreted as by the xpointer/
23:10:11 [timbl]
http://www.w3.org/2010/10/19-tagmem-irc.html#T21-42-47
23:20:23 [noah]
Explicitly "grandfather" application/rdf+xml by exempting it, as a special case. When the mime type is *+xml, then the semantics of fragment identifiers are defined by the XPointer specification, except for application/rdf+xml where they are defined by the RDF specs.
23:21:12 [masinter`]
Suggest changing "We do not state a preference for one of these approaches over the other." to "We were not agreed as to which of these approaches was better."
23:21:26 [noah]
Remove "heated discussion", please.
23:22:46 [masinter`]
Yves: ask them to keep us informed
23:23:31 [masinter`]
noah: please note the TAG 'resolved'
23:24:31 [masinter`]
LM: s/two approaches met with general acceptance/the tag resolved to recommend one of two approaches/
23:25:17 [noah]
The TAG resolved that either of the following two approaches would be acceptable, and we would appreciate your consideration of them.
23:25:30 [masinter`]
1+ noah's
23:25:47 [masinter`]
. RESOLVED: JAR to mail after editing as per discussion
23:26:17 [noah]
. RESOLVED: The two technical proposals to generic processing are acceptable, and JAR to mail after editing as per discussion
23:27:03 [masinter`]
. RESOLVED: The two technical proposals to generic processing (after editing as per discussion) are acceptable, and JAR to mail after
23:27:16 [masinter`]
. RESOLVED: The two technical proposals to generic processing (after editing as per discussion) are acceptable, and JAR to mail
23:27:34 [masinter`]
. RESOLVED: The two technical proposals to generic processing (after editing as per discussion) are acceptable, and JAR to mail after doing those edits
23:27:42 [masinter`]
RESOLVED: The two technical proposals to generic processing (after editing as per discussion) are acceptable, and JAR to mail after doing those edits
23:28:12 [noah]
ACTION-476?
23:28:12 [trackbot]
ACTION-476 -- Jonathan Rees to draft a short note to 3023bis editors reflecting the discussion / consensus... -- due 2010-10-26 -- OPEN
23:28:12 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/476
23:28:44 [noah]
ACTION-466?
23:28:45 [trackbot]
ACTION-466 -- Larry Masinter to ask Norm, Roy and Martin for concrete use cases where generic processing of fragment ids is important -- due 2010-10-12 -- OPEN
23:28:45 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/466
23:28:55 [noah]
close ACTION-466
23:28:55 [trackbot]
ACTION-466 Ask Norm, Roy and Martin for concrete use cases where generic processing of fragment ids is important closed
23:29:19 [noah]
ACTION-448?
23:29:19 [trackbot]
ACTION-448 -- Noah Mendelsohn to schedule discussion of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jun/0394.html on 26 August (followup to 24 June and 12 August discussion) -- due 2010-10-12 -- PENDINGREVIEW
23:29:19 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/448
23:30:06 [noah]
close ACTION-448
23:30:07 [trackbot]
ACTION-448 Schedule discussion of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jun/0394.html on 26 August (followup to 24 June and 12 August discussion) closed
23:34:06 [masinter`]
topic: TPAC scheduling (again)
23:34:10 [masinter`]
DKA: discussing inviting selected WG chairs to meet with TAG at TPAC
23:39:02 [timbl]
http://www.w3.org/2010/roadmap/tag-goals.svg
23:41:32 [masinter`]
(discussion of TAG roadmap, actions, goals for next steps)
23:44:40 [masinter`]
q+
23:44:53 [timbl]
q-
23:45:19 [masinter`]
there are more the top level TAG goals than we have on our top level list so far, since the MIME and web, persistent identifiers weren't in the top level list
23:46:07 [masinter`]
my main concern about metadata is that metadata work in W3C seems to fall into pits
23:46:14 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to schedule group discussion of goals and roadmap for metdata work
23:46:14 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-486 - Schedule group discussion of goals and roadmap for metdata work [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2010-10-27].
23:49:08 [timbl]
q+
23:54:30 [masinter`]
adjourn, time to pack up computres