IRC log of tagmem on 2011-02-09

Timestamps are in UTC.

00:45:27 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
01:19:55 [plinss]
plinss has joined #tagmem
02:35:40 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
03:24:28 [plinss]
plinss has joined #tagmem
04:23:13 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
13:57:29 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
13:57:29 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:58:40 [Ashok]
scribenick: Ashok
13:58:43 [DKA]
DKA has joined #tagmem
13:58:55 [jar]
zakim, who is here?
13:58:55 [Zakim]
sorry, jar, I don't know what conference this is
13:58:56 [Zakim]
On IRC I see DKA, RRSAgent, Zakim, timbl, Ashok, ht, jar, trackbot, Yves
13:59:01 [jar]
zakim, this will be tag
13:59:01 [Zakim]
"tag" matches TAG_f2f()9:00AM, and TAG_f2f()8:30AM, jar
13:59:17 [Ashok]
scribe: Ashok
14:00:32 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
14:00:47 [plinss]
plinss has joined #tagmem
14:01:03 [Ashok]
scribenick: Ashok
14:03:00 [johnk]
johnk has joined #tagmem
14:04:33 [masinter]
masinter has joined #tagmem
14:05:23 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
14:05:24 [ht]
14:05:45 [ht]
14:14:56 [DKA]
First draft of "product" page for privacy drafts:
14:16:04 [johnk]
johnk has joined #tagmem
14:16:09 [Norm]
Norm has joined #tagmem
14:16:28 [Ashok]
Topic: HTML-XML-Divergence-67: HTML / XML Unification
14:18:09 [johnk] - I did this when I was reading the HTML5 spec last year
14:20:18 [Ashok]
Noah: Norm is chairing the XML/NTML unification taskforce
14:20:43 [Ashok]
14:21:51 [Ashok]
Noah: Issue-120 on HTML is on distributed extensibility
14:22:06 [Ashok]
... there is also an issue on RDFa prefixes
14:23:27 [Ashok]
Norm: We consituted the taskforce with a mixture of XML and HTML folks
14:24:02 [noah]
Norm's blog entry on the state of play in the HTML/XML Unification subgroup:
14:24:15 [Ashok]
... strted tofigure out what the problem was ... didn't get very far
14:24:26 [Ashok]
... then started on usecases
14:24:26 [ht]
14:24:47 [noah]
Use cases wiki:
14:24:53 [Ashok]
s/tofigure/to figure
14:25:21 [Ashok]
Norm: We can discuss the usecases
14:25:41 [Ashok]
Larry: They are usecase categories
14:26:14 [Ashok]
... you say XML Toolcahin but there are many flavors of Toolchains with different requirements
14:26:35 [Ashok]
... I don't see roundtripping
14:27:04 [Ashok]
Norm: Roundtripping was something we talked about but did not make it as a usecase
14:28:03 [Ashok]
Larry: Some may notn agree with usecases ... relating them to commercial use nay be very helpful
14:28:18 [Ashok]
14:28:31 [Ashok]
14:28:51 [masinter]
s/may not agree with usecases/may not think usecases are important/
14:29:27 [Ashok]
ht: The guy from Deuthe bank talked about how XHTML had been very helpful
14:29:33 [masinter]
14:29:44 [masinter]
14:30:33 [Ashok]
ht: discusses another commercial usecase
14:30:51 [masinter]
i think our feedback that going down to get more concrete examples that would increase credibility
14:30:54 [Ashok]
ht: Such commercial usecases would be useful
14:31:16 [Ashok]
14:32:19 [masinter]
HTML is not good for data scraping....
14:32:30 [Ashok]
ht: Many colleagues scrape data and waste lots of time with HTML ... XHTML is much better for then
14:32:38 [masinter]
14:34:37 [Ashok]
Larry: Details usecases -- analysis and extraction
14:34:44 [ht]
s/Deuthe bank/Deutsche Telekom AGKai Scheppe/
14:35:05 [ht]
s/AGKai/AG Kai/
14:35:51 [Ashok]
Noah: Norm, could you talk about the mindset of the group and where it is going
14:36:02 [masinter]
different detailed use cases have different requirements... requirements of "scraping" might be performance requirements, while those of "processing" care about fidelity
14:36:13 [masinter]
round-tripping has high requirement for fidelity
14:37:08 [Ashok]
Noah: Says group members ready to leave
14:37:38 [Ashok]
... if we refine usecases that may convince some people to stay and work on the issue
14:37:58 [Ashok]
Larry: We need to take requirements from real commercial users
14:38:57 [Ashok]
Norm: Roundtripping may be a new usecase
14:40:32 [Ashok]
Larry: usecase is starting with HTML, doing some XML processing abd then enitting HTML
14:41:47 [Ashok]
Tim: The common DOM does not work because you don't add new TBody elements
14:42:25 [timbl]
q+ to wonder about scripts
14:42:38 [noah]
ack next
14:42:40 [Zakim]
timbl, you wanted to wonder about scripts
14:42:46 [Ashok]
Larry: Using an XML Toolcahin to produce HTML -- new usecase
14:44:05 [noah]
TBL: If the task force just nourishes and maintains the concept of polyglot, that would be very userful
14:45:12 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
14:46:08 [Ashok]
Norm: The hTML folks were quick o reject the Polyglot spec as too brittle ... too strict about angle brackets etc.
14:46:49 [noah]
Norm: Polyglot is perceived as fragile for the same reasons as any XML, I.e. too strict about perfect syntax
14:47:08 [masinter]
masinter has joined #tagmem
14:47:17 [masinter]
"race to the bottom"
14:47:26 [noah]
Noah: I don't buy that, because I think the #1 use case for polyglot is for people who are using XML tool chains or are happy to produce "perfect" syntax, but whose users require content served text/html...
14:47:52 [noah], they want a spec that tells them just what they can and can't put into that perfect syntax and have it work right when served text/html
14:47:59 [timbl]
q+ to talk about race to the top
14:48:23 [Ashok]
ht: Producing polyglt is hard so once someone starts using a single language everyone goes to that -- race to the bottom
14:48:28 [masinter]
"I think "use XML toolchain to produce HTML" is the most common use case in the industry, and that polyglot is likely the most appropriate direction for them
14:50:36 [timbl]
Note to scrivbe: ht didb't assert "Producing polyglt is hard so once someone starts using a single language everyone goes to that -- race to the bottom" he was quoting it from the wiki
14:50:43 [Ashok]
Larry: There may be changes to HTML ... the api to the DOM may have some options ... e.g. not failing in some way
14:51:12 [Ashok]
... some guidance about what not to use
14:51:24 [Ashok]
ht: That's the polyglot document
14:51:59 [Ashok]
Larry: No, it can have unbalanced brackets but does not use some features
14:52:12 [Ashok]
Norm: I think there is a single DOM
14:52:33 [noah]
New use case wiki page (very rough):
14:52:35 [masinter]
document.write is the leading example
14:53:01 [Ashok]
Tim: For many people the DOM is an API ... supports the same methds
14:53:25 [Ashok]
Noah: XML and HTML processors working on the DOM
14:53:42 [noah]
14:53:45 [noah]
ack next
14:53:47 [Zakim]
timbl, you wanted to talk about race to the top
14:53:50 [Ashok]
ht: There is html in conversation and the html out conversation
14:54:38 [noah]
q+ to push back a bit on Tim's claim about polyglot
14:54:43 [Ashok]
Tim: It is easy to produce polyglot documents ... avoids document.write
14:55:24 [Ashok]
... run it thru tidy ... if you produce polyglot you gaet 2 sets of people using it ... html folks and xml folks
14:55:41 [Ashok]
... so there will be a 'race to the top'
14:56:21 [Ashok]
Noah: Sympathetic to polyglot
14:56:27 [Norm]
Norm has joined #tagmem
14:56:48 [masinter]
polyglot is useful for use cases that weren't in the set of use cases written up
14:56:49 [Ashok]
... useful for simple cases ... what about using external libraries, etc.
14:57:15 [Ashok]
... these may use document.write
14:57:39 [Ashok]
... so does Polyglot apply in these cases
14:57:42 [masinter]
"document.write" isn't the entire set of things that are "HTML specific DOM operations", but it's a good poster child for it
14:58:22 [Ashok]
Norm: The vast majority of Web docs are string concatenetaion and they don't want to run tidy
14:58:32 [Ashok]
s/are/are using/
14:59:29 [Ashok]
Larry: People may be discounting Polyglot because they are not looking at right usecases
15:00:45 [Ashok]
Noah: Added usecase 8
15:01:45 [masinter]
the task force should be looking at creating a document that is acceptable to the W3C and web community... their local agreement is ok
15:01:49 [Ashok]
Noah: Should we invest in improving the Polyglot document
15:02:16 [Ashok]
Norm: I thought the Polyglot document went as far as it could
15:02:55 [Ashok]
Larry: There is a large community of people with toolchain who needs to satisfied
15:03:24 [Ashok]
Norm: The taskforce will produce a report and that will be reviewed
15:03:48 [Ashok]
... I was unable to persuade people to make technical changes
15:04:18 [Ashok]
Noah: Talks about the taskforce and peoples motivations
15:04:36 [masinter]
A good faith participation in a task force would be to agree on a problem statement for the task force.
15:05:16 [Ashok]
larry: What is the task?
15:05:36 [Ashok]
Norm: It proved to be difficult to state the problem
15:05:52 [Ashok]
... so people moved on to usecases
15:06:40 [Ashok]
Larry: Now that you have usecase are you going to try and define the prooblem again
15:07:39 [Ashok]
Noah: The tone of the taskforce has been constructive
15:08:28 [Ashok]
Larry: My experience is that when you are at loggerheads, bring in more people
15:09:03 [Ashok]
... bring in people who need the solution
15:09:13 [DKA]
DKA has joined #tagmem
15:10:03 [Ashok]
Noah: Will the real users come to the taskforce and explain their usecases?
15:11:23 [Ashok]
Larry: Document in the report where there is not consensus and why
15:12:50 [Ashok]
Norm: Usecase number 4 is most bizzare
15:12:51 [timbl]
q+ to ask about FPML
15:13:06 [masinter]
the XML -> (XML/HTML polyglot ) -> XML or HTML tool chain
15:13:18 [masinter]
and the use case of "scraping" as a kind of consuming
15:16:35 [Ashok]
Noah: Some folks claim no changes are needed ... HTML is the answer and XML is not helpful
15:17:11 [ht]
q+ to make the XSLT-in-the-browser poiint
15:18:02 [Ashok]
Norm: I think taskforce has gone as well as it could
15:18:30 [Ashok]
... no usecase has convinced the HTML folks that they need to change
15:18:51 [Ashok]
Peter: What changes are you thinking of
15:19:20 [noah]
NW: Even the script hack can be useful.
15:19:28 [noah]
TBL: What's the script hack?
15:19:47 [noah]
NW: <script type="application/xml"> plus a shim that finds that stuff in the DOM and parses the XML
15:19:58 [noah]
NW: The XQuery folks are actually doing this.
15:20:18 [noah]
NW: On good days, you can almost imagine this is acceptable.
15:21:23 [noah]
15:21:43 [Ashok]
Noah: For running XQuery in the browser
15:22:19 [Ashok]
Larry: The thing that will cause change is serious users
15:25:28 [Ashok]
Norm: Now that many browsers ship with XHTML support you can just use XHML
15:25:50 [Ashok]
15:26:48 [ht]
zakim, q?
15:26:49 [Zakim]
I see noah, timbl, ht on the speaker queue
15:27:24 [Ashok]
Noah: People have different perspectives ... worried about different users
15:28:54 [timbl]
15:28:57 [noah]
15:29:25 [masinter]
masinter has joined #tagmem
15:30:05 [noah]
q+ to answer Henry
15:30:12 [noah]
ack ht
15:30:12 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to make the XSLT-in-the-browser poiint
15:30:13 [Ashok]
ht: I'm concerned that people say that the XML to HTML problem is the same as anything to HTML
15:30:26 [masinter]
xml & xslt use case is important
15:30:30 [Ashok]
... so why do we have XSLT in the browser
15:31:25 [Ashok]
ht: Use script tag to put not HTML stuff in HTML
15:32:13 [masinter]
XML as constituted part
15:32:19 [masinter]
15:32:21 [noah]
ack next
15:32:23 [Zakim]
timbl, you wanted to ask about FPML
15:32:29 [Ashok]
... what is the real substantive value of XML as how data gets on the web
15:32:39 [noah]
15:32:57 [masinter]
q+ to note that perspective, "best practice" recommendations are important
15:33:49 [Ashok]
Tim: Asks about FBML ... adds tags to HTML
15:35:30 [Ashok]
JohnK: Facebook says they are deprecating it in favor of CSS, Javascript
15:35:32 [masinter]
masinter has joined #tagmem
15:35:39 [masinter]
15:35:42 [masinter]
15:35:53 [johnk]
15:36:07 [Ashok]
Tim: Talk about lack of modularity in CSS
15:36:35 [masinter]
many IETF specs use XML for interchange, and need presentation... would like to make sure those use cases are represented
15:37:05 [Ashok]
Dan: Activity streams and other socila network speca are XML-based
15:37:23 [masinter]
XML + XSLT might be more important than XHTML?
15:37:38 [Ashok]
Norm: XML has failed only in the client otherwise very useful and widely used
15:38:06 [Ashok]
... some pressure to move to JSON
15:39:01 [DKA]
Ostatus specification I mentioned:
15:39:55 [DKA]
To be brought in as an input into
15:40:05 [masinter]
(1) task force should agree to "change proposals" to HTML spec that encompass the proposed solutions as "best practice", perhaps by making reference to task force report.
15:40:19 [Ashok]
15:40:21 [DKA]
Leveraging (XML) activity streams spec:
15:40:23 [masinter]
(2) question about XML + XSLT vs. XHTML in priority
15:40:53 [noah]
ack next
15:40:54 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to answer Henry
15:41:32 [Ashok]
Noah: I don'tn think XSL will come and go because of the taskforce
15:41:48 [noah]
ack next
15:41:49 [Ashok]
... many apps would break
15:41:50 [Zakim]
masinter, you wanted to note that perspective, "best practice" recommendations are important
15:42:07 [Ashok]
15:42:24 [noah]
Noah: to be clearer, what I said is that XSLT won't go away in the browsers for the right reasons, I.e., it would break lots of existing deployed software if it were removed.
15:43:01 [noah]
Noah: maybe or maybe not there would be enough future value to motivate keeping it if there weren't such compatibilty issues, but I believe it will stay in any case.
15:43:09 [Ashok]
Larry: You will come up with best practices. These should be pointed to by the HTML spec
15:43:19 [noah]
s/in any case/if only for compatibility, at least for awhile. Just my opinion./
15:44:05 [Ashok]
Norm: Do you think there is stuff in HTML spec that contradicts what the taskforce says? That would be interesting.
15:44:33 [Ashok]
... and much tougher area
15:45:53 [Ashok]
Larry: Perhaps your charter should be: look at usecases and recommend bset practices
15:46:03 [Ashok]
15:46:23 [Ashok]
Norm: I think I can get the taskforce to agree to that
15:46:57 [timbl]
(Suppose you parse XML to a JS object not a dom .. how close is XML to JSON anyway? you have to decide whether element contents are going to be null or a string or list (mixed content)) Certainly the problem of mapping to RDF is a common problem, and a common mapping language would probably work.)
15:47:17 [ht]
The XMLHttpRequest CR draft does still 'privilege' XML, as parsed per the XML specs
15:47:31 [Ashok]
Break for 20 minutes
16:17:39 [Ashok]
Topic: HTML Prefixes, Namespaces and Extensibility
16:18:10 [Ashok]
Noah: Describes background of issue -- decentralized extensibility in HTML
16:19:20 [Ashok]
... they held a survey for WG memebrship but TAG also sent a note
16:19:29 [noah]
HTML WG held a survey, TAG input at
16:20:05 [noah]
HTML WG Chairs' decision:
16:20:19 [Ashok]
16:20:36 [Ashok]
Noah: They decided to do nothing
16:21:13 [Ashok]
The note says they looked for evidence that decentralized extensibility was important and did not find enough
16:21:26 [Ashok]
... they will look at new evidence
16:21:27 [noah]
The main decentralized extensibility issue is
16:21:38 [noah]
There is also on prefixing, especially for RDFa
16:22:45 [Ashok]
... they say use RDFa without prefix mechanism
16:23:01 [Ashok]
Noah: Back to issue 41
16:24:40 [jar]
16:25:25 [Ashok]
Working thru mail from HTML WG re. the decision
16:25:40 [DKA]
16:26:26 [DKA]
16:32:56 [Ashok]
Noah: We discussed all the proposals and decided to back the "like SVG" proposal
16:33:12 [Ashok]
ht: It is a qualified version of the Microsoft proposal
16:38:52 [johnk]
16:40:15 [Ashok]
Tim: Re. Uncontested Observations. We did not argue for removal of existing extensibility points
16:41:00 [Ashok]
... existing extensibility points have serious architectural limitations
16:42:56 [Ashok]
... <object> is horrible ... would not use this to add a new form of bold
16:45:08 [noah]
16:45:18 [noah]
16:45:30 [Ashok]
Larry: Users do often undersatnd relation between prefixes and namespaces ... some may find this confusing
16:45:41 [Norm]
ack DKA
16:45:44 [noah]
ack next
16:45:50 [Norm]
q+ johnk
16:45:53 [Ashok]
16:46:05 [masinter]
masinter has joined #tagmem
16:46:12 [masinter]
16:46:37 [masinter]
q+ to talk about process
16:46:46 [Ashok]
Dan: Maybe we shd pick our battles with HTML WG
16:46:52 [Norm]
16:47:36 [noah]
q+ to talk about possible response
16:47:37 [Norm]
q+ to suggest that there is no more important issue than this one.
16:47:52 [Ashok]
... put on our energies into the taskforce
16:47:56 [Norm]
ack johnk
16:48:10 [Ashok]
JohnK: Not useful to go thru the email point by point
16:48:50 [Ashok]
... we want ability to add attributes with namespaces without any approval
16:49:04 [Ashok]
16:49:33 [Ashok]
Tim: Some people argue that if you add a namespace that is bad
16:50:02 [Ashok]
... they don't have a model of special user communities of browser users
16:50:39 [Ashok]
JohnK: Asks whether architectural arguments are not self-evident
16:51:05 [Norm]
ack masinter
16:51:05 [Zakim]
masinter, you wanted to talk about process
16:51:13 [Ashok]
Could we just list these arguments
16:51:14 [Norm]
16:51:22 [DKA]
16:51:26 [ht]
q+ to support the pick our fights proposition
16:52:08 [Ashok]
Larry: I see no point in TAG responding to HTML WG at this point
16:52:38 [Ashok]
... we can advise the Director how to respond to the appeal
16:52:59 [Ashok]
.... better to let the HTML document get to Last Call
16:53:05 [johnk]
johnk's specific potential architectural issues "What we mean when we say distributed extensibility
16:53:06 [johnk]
arguments for:
16:53:06 [johnk]
* that it should be possible for anyone to define their own markup
16:53:06 [johnk]
extensions (and the syntactic/semantic "meaning" of said extensions)
16:53:06 [johnk]
without permission from anyone else
16:53:07 [johnk]
* that we should encourage these extensions to be publicly (not
16:53:08 [johnk]
"proprietarily") available without the permission of the HTML WG
16:53:26 [johnk]
counter-argument: encourages proprietary extensions to HTML?
16:53:48 [Norm]
ack noah
16:53:48 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to talk about possible response
16:53:51 [Ashok]
Larry: It is in their charter "encouraged to find extensibility mechanisms"
16:53:52 [jar]
16:54:30 [masinter]
"he HTML WG is encouraged to provide a mechanism to permit independently developed vocabularies such as Internationalization Tag Set (ITS), Ruby, and RDFa to be mixed into HTML documents. Whether this occurs through the extensibility mechanism of XML, whether it is also allowed in the classic HTML serialization, and whether it uses the DTD and Schema modularization techniques, is for the HTML WG to determine."
16:54:30 [Ashok]
Noah: Worth looking at how much decentralized extensinility in the spec
16:54:42 [noah]
16:54:48 [Ashok]
... I think it allows decentralized extensibility
16:55:06 [Ashok]
... what it does not have is a mechanism to avaid name collisions
16:56:23 [Ashok]
Noah: I believe that if I come up with a new element I cannot put it in a namespace
16:57:00 [Ashok]
but it can write a doc about the element and I can use it and it will appear in the DOM
16:57:21 [Ashok]
... I can use Javascript on this DOM node
16:58:02 [Ashok]
Noah: So, you do have distributed extensibility .... waht you don't have a mechanism for preventing collisions
16:58:20 [Ashok]
16:58:50 [Norm]
16:58:58 [masinter]
q+ to talk about
16:59:07 [Norm]
ack ht
16:59:07 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to support the pick our fights proposition
16:59:16 [Ashok]
Noah: So, if we can agree on that we can criticize that
16:59:33 [masinter]
and also
17:00:29 [Ashok]
ht: I agree with Dan and Larry in saying that there is no point in pursuing the opportunity for pushback that is in this note
17:00:35 [noah]
Noah: you also are, and I can see the arguments on both sides of this, losing the ability to "follow your nose" to find the pertinent specs when some random document is encountered, and that document uses applicable specs. You can't in general find the specs from the document.
17:00:48 [noah]
Noah: with namespaces, whatever their other problems, you can.
17:01:14 [noah]
17:01:22 [Norm]
ack masinter
17:01:22 [Zakim]
masinter, you wanted to talk about
17:02:13 [Ashok]
Larry: We could respond to IETF document on extensibility ... brings in a broader perspective
17:02:52 [noah]
Hmm, Larry says HTML is a protocol "sort of". Well, yes sort of, but I'm more familiar with the "protocols & formats formulation". HTML is more a format, and I don't think the versioning considerations for formats are in general the same as for protocols.
17:03:00 [Ashok]
... we could look at their arguments and see if they apply to HTML
17:03:15 [Ashok]
... some new evidence to bear on the process
17:03:45 [noah]
q+ to do a logistics & time check
17:04:26 [Ashok]
Larry: Another related document
17:05:14 [Ashok]
Procedures and Processes for Protocols Extensibility Mecahnisms
17:05:37 [Ashok]
Noah: Looks like 4775 is recomending Registries
17:05:56 [Ashok]
Discussion about registries
17:06:19 [Ashok]
.... and whether they help ot hinder distributed etensibilities
17:06:46 [Ashok]
17:10:11 [noah]
17:10:16 [noah]
" An extension is often likely to make use of additional values added
17:10:16 [noah]
to an existing IANA registry (in many cases, simply by adding a new
17:10:16 [noah]
"TLV" (type-length-value) field). It is essential that such new
17:10:16 [noah]
values are properly registered by the applicable procedures,"
17:11:49 [masinter]
the power struggle is part of it "who has control"
17:11:58 [masinter]
but the power struggle is confounded by the technical issues
17:12:06 [Norm]
17:13:21 [noah]
17:13:23 [Norm]
q+ to draw the parallel with MathML and SVG
17:13:48 [Ashok]
Discussion of how extensibility really works
17:13:52 [Norm]
17:16:08 [Ashok]
Larry: HTML decision narrow ... there were no acceptable proposals
17:16:58 [Ashok]
Tim: We are trying to provide a solution for the little guy ... URLs are easy to mint
17:17:15 [Norm]
ack noah
17:17:15 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to do a logistics & time check
17:17:17 [ht]
q+ to mention the Accessibility parallel
17:17:29 [masinter]
17:17:29 [trackbot]
ACTION-120 -- Dan Connolly to review of "Usage Patterns For Client-Side URL parameters" , preferably this week -- due 2008-03-20 -- CLOSED
17:17:29 [trackbot]
17:17:31 [Ashok]
...create little community of browserusers
17:17:37 [masinter]
17:18:02 [Norm]
ack ht
17:18:02 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to mention the Accessibility parallel
17:18:02 [Ashok]
s/browserusers/browse rusers/
17:18:36 [Ashok]
s/browserusers/browser users/
17:19:24 [masinter]
17:19:24 [trackbot]
ISSUE-120 does not exist
17:21:42 [Ashok]
ht: Since HTML WG have resolved Issue 41 this can wait
17:22:07 [Ashok]
... you can send mail asking if we can wait on 120
17:22:11 [Ashok]
17:23:02 [ht]
In terms of thinking about advising the Director as we come up to a Process milestone at which objections wrt DistrExtens may be on the agenda, Tim's point about standing up for the little guy reminded me of a possible parallel with I18N and Accessibility -- Director's Review is the point at which unrepresented consituencies are considered
17:33:30 [masinter`]
masinter` has joined #tagmem
17:33:37 [masinter`]
17:34:32 [masinter`]
17:35:36 [masinter`]
17:51:50 [ht]
Candidate small languages for use in distr. exten. : XForms, XMP, FBML (Facebook Markup Language, now deprecated), CML (Chemical Markup Language), [Music?]
17:52:27 [Norm]
There is a music markup language, Michael Kay brought it up as an example
17:53:46 [masinter`]
do we want to help any of these communities make their case?
17:54:19 [masinter`]
unless there is a plug-in architecture? where the plug-in gets auto-loaded?
17:54:58 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
18:16:24 [ht]
I think the plugin support is already there
18:22:41 [masinter]
masinter has joined #tagmem
18:22:51 [masinter]
/scribe: Masinter
18:22:58 [masinter]
scribe: masinter
18:23:09 [ht]
scribenick: masinter
18:23:13 [ht]
Scribe: Larry Masinter
18:23:47 [masinter]
topic: Norm, XML HTML
18:24:23 [masinter]
ht: What is goal of his activity?
18:24:46 [masinter]
noah: goal is to help this task force be successful
18:25:12 [masinter]
norm: want to go through use case in more detail
18:25:37 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
18:25:51 [masinter]
norm: if there are specific use cases that aren't satisfied, especially interesting
18:26:02 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
18:26:32 [masinter]
18:26:56 [masinter]
ht: how many such parsers are there?
18:27:22 [masinter]
norm: I believe there are 2 or 3. Henri in Java, Sam in Ruby, someone else....
18:27:51 [masinter]
ht: when I looked a few months ago, there was no tool that did what I needed, which were 'error recovery'
18:28:52 [masinter]
ht: this "Solution" is at least misleading. "Truth in advertising"
18:29:58 [masinter]
larry: Henry said he found NONE. If there is NONE, it might mean that it is impossible. A solution that requires something 'impossible' isn't a solution.
18:30:43 [masinter]
noah: if parsers are needed, then ones that are needed will get built.
18:31:03 [masinter]
johnk: there isn't enough need from stand-alone parsers, such as they are extractable from browsers.
18:31:46 [masinter]
tim: I rewrote problem statement, and edited it into the "Discussion" tag
18:32:06 [masinter]
(looking at
18:32:22 [johnk]
johnk: it hasn't yet been determined that there is enough need for a standalone HTML5 parser such that there is a clear need to separate it from other software (such as browser)
18:32:34 [masinter]
tim: I took out some of the derogatory comments that were garbage ("race to the top" vs. "race to the bottom")
18:33:31 [masinter]
tim: I would like a ringing endorsement of polyglot to come out of this task force.
18:34:13 [masinter]
norm: that isn't polyglot... the mapping of HTML into XML because there is an XML document that has the same DOM as the HTML
18:34:51 [masinter]
tim: the requirement to accept polylot on the priority
18:35:20 [masinter]
larry: there are really at least three very sub-categories here (HTML -> XMLO tool chain)
18:43:57 [masinter]
larry: (1) extract, analyze (2) round-trip (3) ...
18:44:19 [masinter]
norm: Use case 2: (looking at
18:44:26 [masinter]
(looking at
18:45:44 [masinter]
tim: you need to put something in the examples to make it clear that this is not "XHTML" but XML in general, e.g., docbook
18:46:25 [masinter]
norm: not sure that this is a real use case, not a lot of enthusiasm for this
18:46:46 [masinter]
(looking at now)
18:48:32 [masinter]
larry: in #2, separate 'browser' from 'non-browser'
18:48:58 [masinter]
Examples are things like documentation
18:50:50 [masinter]
larry: copy/paste and clipboard thing is a separate use case
18:51:14 [masinter]
tim: I'm impressed that copy/paste from web to email works
18:51:28 [masinter]
tim: table from web page into mail message and it works
18:51:54 [masinter]
norm: I expect the techniques that it will let that work
18:52:02 [masinter]
norm: oxygen does a whole bunch of work to make that work
18:53:31 [masinter]
tim: thinking about the RDF case... you get a piece of HTML in the middle of RDF so that works
18:54:12 [masinter]
tim: if you do any form of escaping, in general there is no expectation that if you put some escaped CDATA in the XML that it has any meaning, and no expectation... this happens in RSS
18:54:35 [masinter]
norm: of the two, the escaped text is far less effective
18:55:03 [masinter]
norm: I noticed in the Twitter API that the identity of the submitter is escaped HTML
18:55:25 [masinter]
tim: Microsoft's odata ("almost linked data") when you get a feed it's an RSSFeed
18:55:48 [masinter]
ht: ((missed example))
18:56:42 [Norm]
In Atom, HTML markup is sometimes escaped and sometimes not, using a type attribute to distinguish between them.
18:58:11 [ht]
Is it expected that this will work: <object type="application/xml" data="data:<hello xml:lang='en'>world</hello>" /> ?
18:59:13 [masinter]
18:59:33 [masinter]
noah: couldn't introduce a new tag other than 'script'
18:59:58 [masinter]
henry: in polyglot, need CDATA in script, if you need polyglot and use <> in script
19:00:48 [masinter]
or use data:application/xml,<hello ....
19:01:10 [masinter]
now looking at
19:01:24 [masinter]
(discussion of XML5 document)
19:01:36 [masinter]
norm: XML community could take this up....
19:05:33 [timbl]
q+ DanA
19:05:45 [timbl]
q+ timbl
19:07:04 [masinter]
noah: discussion of robustness principle
19:07:15 [masinter]
noah: you should have the same burden to be conservative in what you said
19:08:21 [masinter]
dana: observation: people use string concatenation to produce HTML because to do otherwise wouldn't be satisfactory for performance reason... that's the implicit reason, and they are prone to error
19:08:36 [Norm]
ack dana
19:08:37 [Norm]
ack timbl
19:10:13 [masinter]
tim: related use case: jQuery. jQuery allows you to parse .navigate + something that looks like xquery (it isn't xquery but looks like it, or css selectors) + insert things (looks like HTML), there is no reason that it actually could use implicit tags on close tags, they could do all kinds of things, the critical thing is to get the code to all fit on one line or one page
19:10:57 [masinter]
tim: in cases where people are stuffing strings in... for things that stuff in little bits of syntax (Turtle example), in those cases, it is a nice situation where xml tools could ive people an ability in their scripting
19:11:22 [masinter]
(have been looking at
19:11:53 [masinter]
now looking at
19:12:03 [masinter]
"dead use case", a lot like use case 1
19:12:16 [masinter]
no one was prepared to stand up to do this
19:14:05 [masinter]
larry: separation between situations where things render, vs. things are auxiliary data
19:14:22 [masinter]
19:15:33 [masinter]
noah: what some subgroups don't like is "stop on first error"
19:16:34 [masinter]
noah: this goes on to the describe relative state of play in the various code
19:17:16 [masinter]
noah: the document pretty much just says "documents that are not well formed" are just not well-formed. so the relevant mappings aren't there. That "shortcoming" could be rectified
19:18:19 [masinter]
noah: all of that is to be determined
19:19:56 [masinter]
larry: this is a kind of social engineering through spec writing that is difficult to accomplish without consensus on the goal and agreement to abide by it. Social engineering is to get senders to be conservative in what they send by having some conservative receivers that they are likely to test against.
19:20:38 [masinter]
noah: perception that the technology has died, and dthat the social engineering has had a negative impact on the success
19:21:14 [masinter]
larry: have to get agreement to do social engineering in the first place, and that the goal of having conservative senders is an important goal
19:21:28 [masinter]
noah: is it really doing the fixup you want or not?
19:22:14 [masinter]
noah: have the specs enable you to turn off when you want to
19:23:06 [masinter]
noah: how often or with how much noise or smoke would be a debate you'd have to have
19:24:56 [masinter]
noah: main application was for exchanging mission critical data, which would be an error
19:25:52 [masinter]
ht: in the first two years, the idea that we were building XML for machine-to-machine communication was not on the forefront. It was about getting information in front of humans, and the 'error handling' was there was because the arms race of forgiving viewers was harmful
19:26:30 [masinter]
ht: the motivation was to end the "arms race" of fixup by saying "no one will do fixup"
19:26:51 [masinter]
ht: that's opposite of what we're doing now, which is to say "everyone will do the same kind of fixup"
19:27:46 [masinter]
noah: could go to the community to see if there are some XML fixups that would be useful
19:28:11 [masinter]
ashok: ask the user, flag it, how aggressive a fixup, mash HTML5 fixup
19:28:59 [masinter]
pter: I have no problem with relaxing some of the rules of XML, but I wouldn't like to go all the way of tag fixup, such as happens in HTML. Leave XHTML being an XML application with all of the XML rules.
19:29:10 [masinter]
19:29:22 [masinter]
peter: all you're doing is allowing people to write bad XML
19:29:38 [masinter]
noah: will more people use this if we do this?
19:30:24 [masinter]
tim: too much of a pain typing the quotes around the attributes... some of those things where there is absoluetely no ambiguity, perhaps we could relax the rules.
19:30:40 [masinter]
noah: we should go only as far as possible to get widespread adoption, vs. abandonment.
19:36:28 [masinter]
larry: 7 isn't really a use case, it's a proposed solution looking for use cases. my claim is that the proposal doesn't actually seem to solve any known problem
19:36:36 [masinter]
looking at about
19:37:22 [masinter]
norm: this wasn't there earlier, should have been, because task force talked about it. "Right" answer is that XML tools should grow an HTML output method
19:38:08 [masinter]
(Larry points out again that 'round trip' is more than 'consume and produce' because round trip may have more requirements for preservation )
19:38:39 [DKA]
Scribe: Dan
19:38:43 [DKA]
ScribeNick: DKA
19:38:54 [DKA]
Norm: You're not likely to be cdata in script elements.
19:39:03 [DKA]
... it doesn't work if you use script elements...
19:39:27 [DKA]
Henry: A normal xml serializer would never use cdata sections...
19:41:11 [DKA]
Henry: In all the use that many of us make of xmlspec dtd - you must use output-mode=html - because this produces <p></p> when you have empty paragraphs. Because if you produce <p/> this [messes up most browsers.]
19:41:15 [DKA]
Scribe: Larry
19:41:22 [DKA]
ScribeNick: masinter
19:42:18 [masinter]
noah: Norm, have you gotten useful feedback from us?
19:43:35 [masinter]
norm: I got useful feedback. I'll go back into the minutes, lots of cases for making use cases more detailed. No one has said I've gone off in all the wrong direction....
19:44:08 [masinter]
norm: the trajectory the task force is going to land, I have no idea what to do next....
19:44:56 [masinter]
19:45:21 [Norm]
19:45:21 [DKA]
19:45:26 [Norm]
ack masinter
19:46:18 [noah]
LM: I think our role here is to figure out what the TAG should do given where the taskforce stands.
19:46:23 [Ashok]
19:46:28 [ht]
q+ to say something more about templating
19:46:47 [noah]
LM: I think part of our role is to help those who have a stake in XML to be more easily heard in this process. A lot don't feel they've been heard. These use cases are the vehicle.
19:46:49 [noah]
19:47:34 [noah]
LM: I can see that doing more can be frustrating, but I believe that someone has to do a lot more.
19:48:01 [noah]
NW: I'm not at all unwilling to do more work, I do keep asking >what< you want me to do.
19:49:19 [noah]
LM: I would ask Roy... (discussion tails off)
19:50:53 [noah]
LM: Roy has an XML toolchain, and his review might be interesting.
19:50:56 [noah]
19:51:22 [noah]
NW: I'll break out the use cases and try to figure good candidates to provide feedback on each.
19:52:09 [noah]
NM: You could somewhat publicly ask people for review.
19:53:25 [noah]
NW: Prefer to do it after the report's a bit cleaner -- I don't want to be responsible for people misunderstanding the wiki in its current form
19:53:43 [noah]
ack next
19:53:48 [masinter]
(discussion of process)
19:54:27 [masinter]
dka: in spirit of providing feedback, worth saying "kudos for doing this", amazing you've managed to make the progress you have
19:54:39 [noah]
DKA: Major kudos to Norm for doing what is in many ways a thankless job. There's a lot of good progress here. I support publishing as a TAG note or something like that, once baked.
19:55:24 [masinter]
dka: Not only a browser group, to consider 'what changes should be considered for XML as well', we need to really believe that, to think about how this stuff could be put into place
19:56:06 [masinter]
norm: James did microXML and John Cowan has picked this up and is producing this group. Liam did agree to put something in XML Core that they may would add something into their charter revision about this.
19:56:51 [masinter]
norm: XML5 is an attempt to say how XML as it exists might work better, while MicroXML might be 'how to make XML smaller'; things like "namespaces aren't special"
19:57:14 [masinter]
norm: maybe James was thinking there might be some movement from the HTML side.
19:57:25 [masinter]
noah: how relevant will this be practically?
19:57:51 [noah]
ack next
19:57:51 [masinter]
norm: microXML might be interesting, would like to know more what problems it solves
19:57:53 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to say something more about templating
19:58:44 [masinter]
ht: in terms of looking for concrete use cases, the phrase "templating" does describe some tooling that I've observed ... (XForms is a partial example of this), a successive refinement approach to producing web pages.
20:00:05 [masinter]
ht: there are some architecures out there that work that way... it's a mixture of HTML and proprietary markup, that push it through (not a pipeline, an interate-to-fixed-point processing step) until it gets to the point where there is nothing left but XHTML....
20:00:25 [masinter]
there is a requirement that HTML5 make it not any harder to produce HTML output than it is today
20:00:53 [masinter]
there are a lot of systems that now support IE6....
20:00:54 [DKA]
DKA has joined #tagmem
20:01:24 [masinter]
ht: maybe it is already the case that polyglot HTML5 is not harder than producing XHTML 1.1 polyglot
20:02:17 [ht]
s/produce HTML output/produce (polyglot) HTML output that way/
20:04:54 [ht]
One example of this is the Factonomy ( Framework
20:06:25 [jar]
on break now.
20:06:27 [jar]
20:09:38 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
20:21:05 [noahm]
noahm has joined #tagmem
20:30:03 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
20:38:17 [masinter]
masinter has joined #tagmem
20:40:31 [masinter]
20:40:31 [trackbot]
ISSUE-63 -- Metadata Architecture for the Web -- open
20:40:31 [trackbot]
20:41:11 [masinter]
20:41:11 [trackbot]
ACTION-282 -- Jonathan Rees to draft a finding on metadata architecture. -- due 2011-04-01 -- OPEN
20:41:11 [trackbot]
20:42:21 [masinter]
20:42:58 [ht]
ht has joined #tagmem
20:43:31 [masinter]
jar: slide 6.... not getting consensus
20:46:05 [masinter]
jar: RDFa, tooling might be different, all the deployed stuff will be called into question
20:46:34 [ht]
ht has joined #tagmem
20:49:41 [masinter]
jar: slide 7 interoperability issue: same name used for two different things
20:50:12 [masinter]
jar: another example, 'wants'
20:50:50 [masinter]
ht: facebooks 'likes'... one person likes the page, one person likes the screwdriver
20:52:12 [masinter]
jar: licensing is clearly a problem, 'likes' or 'wants' are less
20:54:29 [masinter]
jar: slide 9.... new uri scheme, foaf...
20:55:13 [masinter]
jar: slide 9 second line shows 6 alternatives for notation
21:07:05 [ht]
Discussion about about="" and the status of Same Document Reference in RDF
21:07:58 [ht]
21:13:25 [noah]
Hmm, from
21:13:37 [noah]
"When a same-document reference is dereferenced for a retrieval action, the target of that reference is defined to be within the same entity (representation, document, or message) as the reference; therefore, a dereference should not result in a new retrieval action. "
21:14:11 [noah]
That doesn't quite say: "The null reference identifies the same resource as the URI used to retrieve the document." Sort of an odd construction. Why? Does this matter?
21:14:24 [masinter]
JAR: I think the best way to get consensus around this is to take it to REC track.... is this a task force thing? is it an objective?
21:14:54 [ht]
Because not all s-d-rs are null references
21:15:07 [masinter]
tim: this broke out on the linked open data list
21:15:19 [noah]
I'm not hung up on the null part, I'm hung up on the "target is defined to be within"
21:15:38 [noah]
That doesn't say what the URI(s) reference.
21:15:47 [noah]
21:15:51 [ht]
Right -- the 'within' is there because the target of "#foo" is not the target of the base URI
21:16:15 [noah]
Yes, but it doesn't mention the resource, it mentions the representation, which is very odd.
21:16:16 [masinter]
tim: linked open data list has many people who have joined recently. Looking at that, there was some real pain expressed ... when you are producing linked data for a bunch of abstract things, it's a pain to have to do 303 all the time, and using hash wasn't satisfactory
21:16:31 [masinter]
tim: two things to do, "Hash is beautiful", or "add a 208"
21:16:40 [noah]
Why don't usually say that a URI identifies something within the representation, except in very unusual edge cases.
21:16:51 [ht]
Yes, that reference/resource distinction is not well-respected here
21:16:55 [masinter]
jar: the TAG should engage on the linked open data list, or invite them to discuss it on the TAG list
21:16:56 [Norm]
Hashes are problematic if the number of items in the document is very large.
21:16:56 [noah]
(We do in particular cases where the media type spec says it does.)
21:16:57 [ht]
Let's look at HTTP-bis
21:17:00 [masinter]
21:17:15 [noah]
But if it's not well respected, then what does the above mean?
21:17:37 [noah]
More to the point, does it matter that we straighten this out in the context of the discussion that JAR is leading?
21:17:44 [ht]
21:17:47 [ht]
I don't think
21:17:51 [noah]
Hmm. OK.
21:21:33 [masinter]
jar: is the tag willing to engage in good faith process intended to get editor's draft
21:21:43 [ht]
This is the answer, noah: "When a same-document reference is dereferenced for a retrieval action"
21:21:53 [ht]
retrieval actions _are_ about representations
21:23:25 [masinter]
ashok: there are other stakeholders
21:23:38 [masinter]
ashok: I would like "those guys" part of the discussion
21:23:53 [masinter]
noah: I think Jonathan means "Recommendation"
21:24:09 [ht]
I agree that "is within" is bad -- it should have used wording that said "is related to in the same way that a full use of the baseURI plus #... if any is related"
21:24:49 [noah]
JAR: right Noah, I'm proposing a formal W3C Recommendation produced using the full W3C process
21:25:38 [masinter]
noah: we had agreed to push this forward as a Rec, and then dropped the ball?
21:25:52 [masinter]
(scribe uncertain what the topic is)
21:26:46 [masinter]
ht: we have precedent for issuing documents on the rec track. We should do that with the content Jonathan is presenting to us.
21:27:12 [masinter]
tim: question is, are there alternatives for solving the problem?
21:27:39 [masinter]
jar: there are three alternatives: engage on LOD, do an architectural rec, form a new working group
21:29:12 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to figure out where we stand with on the rec track
21:29:12 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-521 - Figure out where we stand with on the rec track [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2011-02-16].
21:29:21 [noah]
ACTION-521 Due 2011-03-01
21:29:21 [trackbot]
ACTION-521 Figure out where we stand with on the rec track due date now 2011-03-01
21:29:46 [ht]
ht has joined #tagmem
21:29:46 [noah]
HT: We should do an architectural rec.
21:30:19 [masinter]
larry: if the topic is as broad as JAR's presentation, i would favor a new working group
21:30:29 [noah]
LMM: What about a new working
21:30:34 [masinter]
tim: the TAG could do a focused 'nut' of the core element of httpRange-14
21:30:50 [masinter]
noah: the right thing to do would be to set off on the road of doing that in the tag
21:31:46 [masinter]
noah: if this worth the effort at all, set off down the road to engage the right community, have to watch IP issues
21:32:23 [masinter]
noah: that's the place where they or we would go on
21:33:01 [masinter]
ashok: should this be a separate mailing list?
21:33:28 [masinter]
noah: at some point we should put out an announcement, hey we're working on this
21:34:11 [noah]
Noah: Jonathan, are you willing to actually play the leadership role in taking this down a REC track.
21:34:26 [noah]
JAR: Yes, if the group is willing to provide reviews, or at least stay out of the way.
21:34:46 [masinter]
JAR is showing draft which might become a rec
21:37:57 [masinter]
larry: I would be more comfortably with a working group with a charter around metadata architecture, partly because i know people i would like to get to participate, who would not follow a www-tag discussion
21:40:57 [masinter]
tim: (re jar slide 15) WebArch covers this
21:41:17 [masinter]
jar: someone else holding Nadia responsible for someone else using Dirk's URI referentially
21:42:25 [masinter]
jar: slide 16, (why these questions are useless)
21:43:32 [masinter]
jar: slide 17: segue to persistence
21:45:05 [ht]
ht has joined #tagmem
21:45:11 [noah]
21:45:11 [trackbot]
ACTION-201 -- Jonathan Rees to report on status of AWWSW discussions -- due 2011-01-25 -- PENDINGREVIEW
21:45:11 [trackbot]
21:46:24 [noah]
21:46:24 [trackbot]
ACTION-201 -- Jonathan Rees to report on status of AWWSW discussions -- due 2011-01-25 -- OPEN
21:46:24 [trackbot]
21:47:05 [noah]
ACTION-201 Due 2011-03-07
21:47:05 [trackbot]
ACTION-201 Report on status of AWWSW discussions due date now 2011-03-07
21:47:31 [noah]
21:47:31 [trackbot]
ACTION-478 -- Jonathan Rees 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 -- due 2011-01-31 -- PENDINGREVIEW
21:47:31 [trackbot]
21:48:27 [noah]
21:49:02 [masinter]
topic: action-478
21:49:31 [masinter]
jar: if you take the problem as a reference to a document, that reliably refers to some document, and you want it to work 100 years into the future....
21:49:49 [masinter]
jar: ... and you want that computational agent to be able to resolve it
21:50:06 [masinter]
ht: ... and the tree was an analysis of the failures?
21:51:03 [noah]
s/action-478/Persistence of references/
21:51:11 [noah]
21:51:11 [trackbot]
ACTION-478 -- Jonathan Rees 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 -- due 2011-01-31 -- PENDINGREVIEW
21:51:11 [trackbot]
21:51:44 [masinter]
jar: several functions: publisher producing the document; one who assigns identifier; one who archives the document for a long time; one who looks up a reference
21:52:13 [masinter]
jar: the 19th century view is that the description is written out in natural language (publisher, title, author, date), but "not machine friendly"
21:52:41 [masinter]
jar: if they're actionable, then someone can track these down
21:52:55 [masinter]
ht: the reliability of the citeseer database is 70%
21:53:08 [masinter]
ht: datapoint... that's just correctly identifying what the parts are
21:53:15 [masinter]
s/database/parser for database/
21:53:17 [timbl]
... just oarsing a reference
21:53:45 [masinter]
jar: Hybrid approach... is the hybrid approach good enough?
21:55:04 [Ashok]
Larry: Use the term human-friendly
21:56:01 [masinter]
larry: (2) Hybrid is between (1) and all the rest
21:56:12 [masinter]
"Not a URI", structured reference
21:56:35 [masinter]
Larry: note there was a lot of work on "URC" which was attribute/value pairs for identiying
21:57:18 [masinter]
jar: if you write a URI, you have to have some faith that the scheme registrations are reliable
21:58:07 [masinter]
larry: date + URI (not embedded in a duri)
21:58:37 [masinter]
jar: (going through steps)
21:59:48 [masinter]
jar: "update all web clients" is a miracle
22:00:00 [masinter]
tim: you could install plugins in your client
22:00:56 [masinter]
"not actionable" is "not actionable today"
22:01:45 [masinter]
tim: people will provide ways of resolving
22:02:10 [masinter]
ht: i own a couple of the domain names necessary for 'info' to be dereferenced
22:02:24 [masinter]
larry: note there were urn resolution protocols
22:02:39 [masinter]
jar: lsid was another example, it was never maintained
22:03:01 [masinter]
larry: xmp.iid and xmp.did in
22:04:16 [masinter]
jar: whether the http: scheme as specified is suitable for this purpose
22:05:27 [masinter]
jar: in the case where persistence matters, you can trust the domain owner
22:05:35 [masinter]
22:05:59 [masinter]
larry points to
22:06:22 [noah]
Jonathan is discussing:
22:06:45 [masinter]
jar: was on the phone two weeks ago with Dan on "ownership"
22:06:56 [noah]
s/Dan/Dan Connolly/
22:08:41 [masinter]
larry: Jefferson's Moose book has an interesting history about top level domain ownership
22:09:04 [masinter]
larry: see
22:10:49 [masinter]
noah: (discussion about security, DNS cache poisoning, etc.)
22:11:42 [masinter]
larry: you've identified several different roles, and each node in the tree needs to be evaluated around impact to those roles... may need to also add 'bad guys' and other players
22:11:52 [ht]
Re the earlier aside about info:, when I explored this and its proposed (partial?) resolution mechanism, I discovered a) a dependence on certain sub-domains of the info TLD and b) the fact that several of these were either un-'owned' or in non-appropriate hands. Since then I have 'owned' and, having unsuccessfully tried to get Stu Weibel to take them on
22:12:36 [ht]
My registration of them expires again in a few months. . .
22:13:19 [masinter]
jar: what matters is the person who writes a URI, and the person who wants to read the document, and everything else is infrastructure
22:14:55 [masinter]
larry: archivist is necessary and sufficient.... that is, if there are no archives, having long-term identifiers aren't very useful, and if there is an archive, then whatever they are doing can be long-term.
22:15:13 [masinter]
ht: this might turn into a requirement for infrastructure
22:16:31 [masinter]
jar: hypothesis: it would make a difference to make the DNS root manager to admit that some part of the DNS space had some kind of persistence characteristic, or contractually held to
22:17:15 [masinter]
tim: one way to abandon DNS is to set up an alternative root
22:18:00 [masinter]
jar: then you have to convince the entire world to use that alternate root. There is no communication between Alice and Bob to indicate that they use that alternative root, unless you use another URI scheme
22:18:23 [masinter]
tim: if it's just insurance, you could make a file, and distributed by bittorrent...
22:19:45 [masinter]
jar: what if ICANN agrees that '.arc' is agreed to be (something)
22:22:29 [masinter]
jar: what else do i need to add to this story for the next draft
22:23:21 [masinter]
ht: I need to take the old document to see if the risks it identifies and the goals are all covered here
22:23:37 [masinter]
jar: there are lots of ways of bailing out of this?
22:24:05 [masinter]
ht: information sicence communities have different attitudes to doi
22:24:34 [masinter]
tim: what's interesting, what you want is security in the long term, having more than one solution in parallel is interesting
22:25:03 [masinter]
jar: i imagine some kind of metadata lo
22:26:23 [masinter]
22:27:41 [ht]
LM: Put a GUID in the document, and let search be the retrieval mechanism
22:28:00 [ht]
JAR: Vulnerable to spoofing
22:28:06 [ht]
HST: Use a checksum
22:28:46 [ht]
LM: Right, use MD5 as the GUID
22:29:15 [ht]
HST: What does the URI look like
22:29:22 [ht]
LM: See
22:30:16 [masinter]
lm: every administrative system ends
22:30:39 [masinter]
jar: the binomial system has had, in 250 years, only 10 disputes
22:31:04 [masinter]
(discussion of conflicts over defining documents for species)
22:31:33 [masinter]
noah: (banking systems -- there's a method of correcting anything that is wrong)
22:32:03 [masinter]
jar: my point on that there are systems that are relatively free of authority, that are outside of any system of authority
22:32:10 [ht]
I note that the pblm with using a checksum is that it violates a fundamental principle of archiving, which is to keep your content usable by rolling it forward
22:32:29 [ht]
In the old days, that meant from paper to microfilm to microfiche
22:32:42 [masinter]
larry: the bigger it is, the more likely it is it will fail
22:32:52 [ht]
now it means electronic format evolution
22:33:38 [noah]
22:33:38 [trackbot]
ACTION-478 -- Jonathan Rees 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 -- due 2011-01-31 -- PENDINGREVIEW
22:33:38 [trackbot]
22:34:38 [jar]
masinter said " I don't think a system can be simultaneously X, Y, and scalable"
22:34:41 [noah]
22:34:41 [trackbot]
ACTION-478 -- Jonathan Rees to prepare a second draft of a finding on persistence of references, to be based on decision tree from Oct. F2F Due: 2010-01-31 -- due 2011-01-31 -- OPEN
22:34:41 [trackbot]
22:35:06 [masinter]
administrative, scalable, and stable
22:35:08 [noah]
ACTION-478 Due 2011-03-22
22:35:09 [trackbot]
ACTION-478 Prepare a second draft of a finding on persistence of references, to be based on decision tree from Oct. F2F Due: 2010-01-31 due date now 2011-03-22
22:35:20 [noah]
22:35:20 [trackbot]
ACTION-477 -- Henry S. Thompson to organize meeting on persistence of domains -- due 2011-03-15 -- OPEN
22:35:20 [trackbot]
22:35:40 [noah]
HT: Leave it, still working on it.
22:35:58 [noah]
topic: Reschedule June F2F
22:39:51 [jar]
s/point on/point is/
22:41:58 [jar]
masinter, you have just restated zooko's triangle's_triangle
22:42:29 [masinter]
topic: tag meeting in June
22:42:32 [jar]
bitcoin might show a way to escape it (I'm told... need to research this)
22:43:13 [noah]
RESOLUTION: The June F2F will be in Cambridge 6-8 June 2011
22:43:35 [Ashok]
rrsagent, pointer?
22:43:35 [RRSAgent]
22:46:47 [masinter]
jar, no, zooko's triangle is 'secure, memorable, global' and that's a different set of things
22:47:11 [masinter]
jar, mine is: "requires administration" and "scalable" => "not reliable"
22:48:01 [masinter]
22:49:51 [masinter],txt#T22-43-35
23:05:01 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
23:06:37 [plinss]
plinss has joined #tagmem
23:10:16 [jrees]
jrees has joined #tagmem
23:10:24 [jrees]
Noah there?
23:11:02 [jrees]
Proceed without Timbl - he'll meet us there
23:11:08 [jrees]
Pls ack
23:14:08 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
23:20:38 [jrees_]
jrees_ has joined #tagmem
23:30:21 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tagmem