17:03:27 RRSAgent has joined #tagmem 17:03:27 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/09/01-tagmem-irc 17:03:43 Zakim, call timbl-office 17:03:43 ok, timbl; the call is being made 17:03:45 +Timbl 17:03:48 scribenick: JeniT 17:04:05 Scribe: JeniT 17:04:21 timbl has joined #tagmem 17:04:46 Meeting: W3C TAG Teleconference of 1 September 2011 17:05:02 Chair: Noah Mendelsohn 17:05:25 Date: 1 September 2011 17:05:55 Regret: Dan, Henry and Larry 17:05:56 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/09/01-agenda 17:06:00 Regrets: Dan, Henry and Larry 17:08:17 -> http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/snapshot/report.html 17:08:54 Noah: We may have a brief call next week, but probably not 17:08:57 Topic: Approve minutes of prior meeting(s) 17:09:17 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/08/11-minutes 17:09:26 (I can't do next week anyway.) 17:09:49 RESOLUTION: Accepted minutes from http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/08/11-minutes 17:09:49 RESOLUTION: Minutes of 11-august (http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/08/11-minutes) are approved 17:10:16 Topic: Administrative items 17:10:53 Nice digs! 17:12:14 Scribing: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/09/F2FScribing.html 17:12:19 [well, this will be in the presence of HT] 17:12:27 noah: please sign up to scribe 17:12:51 Topic: ISSUE-67 (HTML-XML-Divergence-67): HTML / XML Unification 17:13:32 Norm: The task force has produced a report 17:13:48 ... it's been edited a few times, there's some new text from noah for an introduction 17:14:02 ... the main stumbling block is that we want to make it more publically visible 17:14:04 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/09/F2FScribing.html 17:14:06 argh... 17:14:31 Draft TAG finding 17:14:33 ... we would like TAG's permission to clean it up and make it public as a Draft XXXX 17:14:40 http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/snapshot/report.html 17:14:45 ... and respond to feedback 17:15:10 timbl has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/09/01-agenda (timbl) 17:15:49 ashok: I would like to see some conclusions in the report 17:15:55 ... even if they were preliminary 17:16:06 ... in Section 2.5 on XML parsing 17:16:21 I see: 3 Conclusions TBD. 17:16:29 ... it mentions efforts to make it more forgiving, but they are not detailed 17:16:34 + +1.617.538.aaaa 17:16:37 ... I'd like to know what the thinking is and where we could go 17:16:48 zakim, aaaa is jar 17:16:48 +jar; got it 17:16:51 Norm: those include XML5, which should be in the references 17:16:57 Could write informally, indicating which conclusions look pretty firm, and which are still controversial/poorly understood 17:16:58 ... other people have done work in this space 17:17:04 Reference to Polyglot? 17:17:20 ... about the conclusions: I can put something in, but it depends on what the community thinks 17:17:37 ... the TF hasn't got any conclusions yet, except that these are ways of addressing the problems raised 17:18:04 ashok: and on XML5, if you could extract some recommendations 17:18:24 Norm: Anne's done a very good job, but I don't think anyone's looked at it with care 17:18:34 ... we'd need to spin up a WG to look at requirements 17:18:55 timbl: there's a polyglot document, is there a reference to polyglot 17:18:59 q+ to talk a bit more about xml5, scope and conclusions 17:19:06 Norm: the polyglot doc is mentioned in the text in 2.1 17:19:08 NW: Ooops, need to clean up references 17:19:16 -jar 17:19:51 timbl: one conclusion is that if you're publishing documents, then being conservative in what you produce involves using polyglot 17:20:04 ... there's another discussion about what W3C should publish in 17:20:12 q? 17:20:14 + +1.617.209.aabb 17:20:16 ... eg using polyglot as an example for the HTML and XML communities 17:20:24 zakim, aabb is jar 17:20:24 +jar; got it 17:20:34 Norm: I don't think there are downsides in publishing documents that can be polyglot, in polyglot 17:21:23 ack next 17:21:23 ... use an HTML5 parser if you're going to be parsing HTML, is a good conclusion 17:21:36 noah, you wanted to talk a bit more about xml5, scope and conclusions 17:21:46 noah: it isn't clear to me how the current structure of the document relates to its scope 17:21:56 ... the original scope was to do more than use cases 17:22:15 ... it was to look at the overlap between the two stacks of HTML and XML 17:22:23 ... to avoid unnecessary duplication between the stacks 17:22:33 ... there was some attempt to do that but it was hard to get common ground 17:22:39 ... so use cases were a starting point 17:22:59 ... the problem statements include the resolution 17:23:26 ... in the draft, we need to talk about the scope of the task force 17:23:41 ... we need to bring out new technology directions and conclusions 17:23:55 ... is this saying that all we can do is use cases? 17:24:04 ... if so why? or is there something broader? 17:24:14 Norm: I can attempt to draft something around that 17:24:31 ... personally, we tried to find common ground, and use cases helped to look at that 17:24:40 ... after looking at the use cases, there didn't seem to be any problems to solve 17:24:55 noah: so the document should say that 17:25:16 Norm: ok, this is good feedback 17:25:24 ... we'll address this in a new draft 17:25:31 ... get the TF to agree to it 17:25:35 ... then come back and see if that helps 17:25:45 noah: is that practical? 17:26:14 Norm: nothing new will happen before the F2F 17:26:59 ACTION: Noah to ping Norm end of Sept. on revised HTML/XML report per discussion on 1 Sept 2011 17:27:00 Created ACTION-591 - Ping Norm end of Sept. on revised HTML/XML report per discussion on 1 Sept 2011 [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2011-09-08]. 17:27:14 ACTION-591 Due 2011-09-30 17:27:14 ACTION-591 Ping Norm end of Sept. on revised HTML/XML report per discussion on 1 Sept 2011 due date now 2011-09-30 17:27:28 -Norm 17:27:29 -Timbl 17:27:32 +jar.a 17:27:36 ooops 17:27:39 -jar 17:27:44 Zakim, call timbl-office 17:27:44 ok, timbl; the call is being made 17:27:45 +Timbl 17:27:52 zakim, who is talking? 17:28:05 noah, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: noah (5%), jar.a (5%) 17:28:18 -jar.a 17:28:36 Topic: HTML5 Review: Microdata/RDFa 17:29:22 +jar 17:30:13 NM: Jeni is taking the lead for the TAG on the microdata/RDFa work 17:30:38 NM: Looking for perspectives from the TAG 17:32:37 JT: There is disagreement as to whether the task force is going to be an effective way to make progress. Some sense that each 'camp' is moving forward mostly independenlty, leading to them being out there side-by-side 17:33:28 JT: Even if so, my personal feeling is that there is useful work for a group of some sort to do in helping to either identify subsets and guidance, change them to bring them together, give guidance to people doing vocabularies, etc. 17:33:59 JT: I would like to know what the TAG thinks about undertaking an effort framed in that way, and whether it's a good use of my "TAG time" in particular. 17:34:11 JT: Also curious whether we should keep pushing harder for convergence. 17:35:08 TBL: My initial hopes for the task force and looking at your blog post... I had the impression that you Jeni thought there was some overlap, and perhaps that some syntax could be shared. I thought if that was the case, a task force could take a real technical look. 17:35:43 TBL: Obviously, you have to get buy in. If there was a small change, e.g. to RDFa, would people be willing to consider such a shift, and similarly for microdata? 17:36:11 TBL: I think Manu's letter is on the pessimistic side 17:37:31 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Aug/0050.html 17:37:56 TBL: If that's technically impossible, I'm willing to put away the task force. If it's technically feasible but politically problematic, then we should hold people accountable if they are intransigent. The future is longer than the past. 17:38:53 JT: I always thought if we were going to get convergence it won't be by "banging heads". Rather, it will likely be by gradually evolving the languages to the point where there is defacto commonality, which people will come to recognize and value. 17:39:48 JT: I'm somewhat inclined to do this through e.g. change proposals and bug proposals. It's important that there also be a polictical context in which such proposals would get the right attention. 17:44:07 NM: F2F session 17:44:12 JT: Probably not 17:45:02 NM: OK, we will not hold time, but I would welcome it if you ask for a session, even for informal brainstorming. 17:45:03 ScribeNick: JeniT 17:45:24 Topic: Planning for Sept. 2011 F2F 17:45:42 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/09/13-agenda.html 17:46:29 noah: a lot of the required reading is already available 17:47:14 noah: my intention is to wrap about 3pm on 3rd day 17:47:32 ... the product pages have been very helpful to me 17:47:53 ... the structure is to first take a look at each of those, and then some of the other things we have 17:48:06 ... section 1 has proposed goals 17:48:06 Goals: 17:48:07 Make progress on our five top priority products: 17:48:15 Prepare client-side state finding for publication (unless we decide there's too much more to do on #! and/or RDFa use of fragids 17:48:15 Review status of RDFa/Microdata task force, and set up appropriate ACTIONs for tracking 17:48:15 Make progress on our other active products 17:48:15 Give guidance and feedback to Norm Walsh and the subcommittee working on XML/HTML Unification 17:48:15 Rebalance TAG member assignments (noting, e.g., Jeni's new responsibilities for RDFa/Microdata) 17:48:45 noah: in client-side state area, we are close to publishing a TAG finding 17:48:56 ... ashok has a draft for review; vote at the meeting to publish 17:49:10 ... next goal will change (reviewing status of RDFa/microdata TF) 17:49:14 ... that's now a maybe 17:49:50 ... we also need to rebalance from people who are overburdened 17:50:30 ... HTML5 Last Call -- Overview 17:50:51 ... this closed on August 3rd 17:51:18 ... the only thing we wanted to take forward was microdata/RDFa 17:51:39 ... we will review and hopefully declare success 17:51:45 ... track microdata/RDFa as its own item 17:52:21 ... this will be a short session, to make sure we haven't lost loose ends 17:52:28 ... might look briefly at microdata/RDFa 17:52:46 ... ISSUE-60 (webApplicationState-60): Web Applications: Client-side state 17:52:53 TAG Finding: Identifying Application State Due date: 1 Nov 2011 17:52:53 25 June 2011: Draft for TAG review based on June 2011 F2F review 17:52:53 1 Sept 2011: Last-call quality draft 17:52:53 W3C Note with FPWD (Raman's version) indicating this work no longer on Rec. track (to be done after reference to finding available) 17:53:25 ... goal is detailed review and a vote on the draft 17:53:42 ... also, when Raman did a 1st version it was put on the Rec track 17:54:04 ... we agreed for Raman's draft to be published as a Note 17:54:21 ... at the F2F in June 17:54:30 ashok: this is Raman's old write-up from 2009? 17:54:55 noah: yes, but it's the version that was published as a FPWD, so the W3C process means we have to do this 17:55:11 ... we can indicate that the TAG finding is the follow-on to that work 17:55:20 that's indeed right, final note with s SoTD explaining where the work is now 17:55:31 ... ISSUE-66 (mimeAndWeb-66-27): IETF Draft on MIME and the Web 17:55:59 Product page: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/mimeweb.html 17:56:38 Larry emails: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Aug/0099.html 17:56:52 ... Larry has said in the last few weeks saying that doing a separate draft from the TAG is no longer the right goal 17:57:00 ... lots of efforts at the IETF that cover the space 17:57:08 ... recommends refocussing on reviewing those 17:57:22 ... discussion on whether to do that or not, and what to say to W3C management 17:57:53 +1 17:59:29 ... ISSUE-60 (webApplicationState-60): Web Applications: Fragment ID Semantics and MIME Types 18:00:05 ... ISSUE-57 (HttpRedirections-57), ISSUE-63 (metadataArchitecture-63) and ISSUE-14 (HttpRange-14) : URI Definition Discovery; Metadata Architecture 18:00:20 jar: ISSUE-58 and Persistence are carry over from June 18:00:45 s/ISSUE-58/ISSUE-57/ 18:01:19 noah: ISSUE-60 (webApplicationState-60): Web Applications: Client-side Storage 18:01:39 ... ashok and I have an action to propose an activity here 18:02:08 ashok: I've been trying to find apps that use client-side storage, and I've not been very successful 18:02:20 ... one wonderful app and a bunch of toys 18:02:53 noah: I'd have thought Google mobile apps would have been poster children 18:03:10 ashok: sure, we can argue that you can do these things offline 18:03:25 ... I was trying to find things where you can write different styles of apps 18:03:46 ... so if there are more examples, that would be wonderful 18:04:06 noah: if you leave off the Google apps, you're leaving off the main interesting things 18:04:22 ... if you have a choice between local and cloud storage, there's a tendency to do it in the cloud 18:04:45 ... so it's natural to see the main uses as tackling network connectivity issues 18:05:01 ashok: different parts of the elephant 18:05:25 noah: ISSUE-50 (URNsAndRegistries-50): Persistent references 18:05:54 ... I think we're invested in this work 18:06:08 jar: it's in a continuing brainstorming stage 18:06:15 ... F2Fs are the best opportunity to talk about this 18:06:54 we're ready to do a product page 18:07:06 or will be at end of session 18:07:20 noah: ISSUE-25 (deepLinking-25): Can publication of hyperlinks constitute copyright infringment? 18:07:35 ... draft was reviewed at last F2F 18:07:49 ... were supposed to get some legal advice 18:07:57 ... Dan says he hasn't had much luck yet 18:08:21 jar: I can get Thynh (sp?) to review it 18:08:27 thinh 18:08:48 s/Thynh (sp?)/thinh/ 18:09:01 noah: might we find a time for him to dial in? 18:09:13 jar: I'll mention it 18:10:35 noah: ISSUE-67 (HTML-XML-Divergence-67): HTML / XML Unification 18:10:39 ... we just covered that 18:11:01 ... there are also optional items 18:11:12 ... carried over bodies from June F2F 18:11:21 ... eb Applications: Design of APIs for Web Applications (minimization) 18:11:34 s/... eb/... Web/ 18:11:39 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/apiminimization.html 18:11:45 Key deliverables with dates: 18:11:45 By 15 October 2011: an approved TAG finding on API minimization 18:11:54 Schedules: 18:11:54 Initial draft finding for community review 2011-07-31 18:12:17 noah: my inclination is to have a session to straighten out a realistic schedule 18:12:40 ... Product: Coordination with IAB/IETF on architecture of web applications: Joint session with Internet Architecture Board 18:12:54 ... we had the joint phone session with the IAB 18:13:05 ... we talked about trying to find other times to meet jointly 18:13:47 Yves: I think F2F time would be a waste 18:14:17 ACTION-565? 18:14:17 ACTION-565 -- Noah Mendelsohn to talk to Bernard about possible IAB/TAG co-location -- due 2011-08-16 -- OPEN 18:14:18 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/565 18:14:30 Noah to schedule ACTION-565 for telcon, not F2F 18:14:59 ACTION-565? 18:14:59 ACTION-565 -- Noah Mendelsohn to talk to Bernard about possible IAB/TAG co-location -- due 2011-08-16 -- PENDINGREVIEW 18:14:59 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/565 18:15:16 noah: ACTION-545: Privacy 18:15:25 ... Web Applications: Security 18:15:26 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/08/11-minutes#item04 18:16:06 ... working on guidance from 11 August to have at most 1/2 hour 18:16:18 ... on security, we have John Kemp's work 18:16:34 ... but we haven't identified who in the TAG should be doing anything, or what it should be 18:16:55 ashok: one thought is to start a security wiki to spell out the state of the art on the web 18:17:07 ... probably worthwhile to also have a wiki about privacy 18:17:21 ... as a spot where people can write about what's going on 18:17:53 noah: if other things crowd these out, they probably won't happen 18:18:23 ashok: I think it's worth speaking briefly about whether we ought to start a wiki 18:18:45 noah: the only reason I'm hesitant is because that might be hard to do briefly 18:19:06 ashok: I think it's important because privacy and security are central 18:19:21 ... I think we should have something 18:19:54 noah: RFC 3023bis and IRI 18:20:37 noah: is there anything that I missed for the agenda? 18:20:49 ... if there are any corrections on relative priorities 18:20:57 jar: Unicode normalisation? 18:21:18 s/jar:/plinss:/ 18:21:49 hmm.... we do need to talk about 3023 even if briefly... 18:22:08 Topic: ACTION-590: Unicode normalization 18:22:30 Email from Addison Phillips http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Jun/0188.html 18:23:26 plinss: This gets interesting in how it impacts HTML5, APIs and so on 18:23:38 ... I think it's something that TAG should be working on 18:24:05 noah: some others were saying that other people have it as their day job 18:24:35 timbl: does the 2nd paragraph mean that current guidelines can't be technically implemented? 18:24:55 plinss: they're not being implemented because they're hard to implement for performance reasons 18:25:14 ... the TAG needs to say that this is important, across specs 18:25:27 ... or to say too little too late and forget it 18:25:55 noah: would it make sense for you (plinss) to write something that the TAG might say (to the private address) 18:26:10 ... it sounds like something that we would write email to address rather than a finding 18:26:19 ... we can then discuss that email 18:26:28 plinss: I can do that 18:26:40 ashok: I wonder if we should have Addison come on a TAG telcon to tell us what's going on 18:26:55 noah: yes, but it would have to be after the F2F 18:28:12 ... we could send an email to Addison 18:28:19 ... saying we're working on a position 18:28:55 Tracker, who do you know? 18:29:16 . ACTION Plinss to draft possible TAG position statement on Unicode, and alert Addison Phillips of our intention to attempt to get agreement starting in October after the F2F 18:29:32 noah: is this worth F2F time 18:29:45 plinss: I think it's worth a little bit of time 18:30:21 ACTION Plinss to draft possible TAG position statement on Unicode, and alert Addison Phillips of our intention to attempt to get agreement starting in October after the F2F 18:30:21 Created ACTION-592 - Draft possible TAG position statement on Unicode, and alert Addison Phillips of our intention to attempt to get agreement starting in October after the F2F [on Peter Linss - due 2011-09-08]. 18:31:03 Topic: ACTION-510: RDF URI mappings in the HTML5 microdata 18:31:33 noah: does Hixie dropping the section resolve your concern, timbl? 18:31:51 timbl: yes, that resolves one concern, raising the concern about no standard mapping from microdata to RDF 18:31:59 noah: ok, we need more discussion of it 18:32:07 timbl: it comes under the TF discussion 18:33:15 Adjourn 18:33:16 -noah 18:33:18 -Yves 18:33:18 -jar 18:33:19 -plinss 18:33:19 -JeniT 18:33:24 rssagent, draft minutes 18:33:25 -Timbl 18:33:40 -Ashok_Malhotra 18:33:41 TAG_Weekly()1:00PM has ended 18:33:43 Attendees were Norm, Ashok_Malhotra, plinss, noah, JeniT, Yves, Timbl, +1.617.538.aaaa, jar, +1.617.209.aabb 18:33:50 rrsagent, draft minutes 18:33:50 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/01-tagmem-minutes.html JeniT 18:39:27 JeniT has joined #tagmem 18:39:30 rrsagent, make log public 18:40:28 rrsagent, bye 18:40:28 I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/01-tagmem-actions.rdf : 18:40:28 ACTION: Noah to ping Norm end of Sept. on revised HTML/XML report per discussion on 1 Sept 2011 [1] 18:40:28 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/01-tagmem-irc#T17-26-59