IRC log of tagmem on 2011-12-15

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:00:40 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
18:00:40 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/12/15-tagmem-irc
18:00:42 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
18:00:44 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be TAG
18:00:44 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see TAG_Weekly()1:00PM already started
18:00:45 [trackbot]
Meeting: Technical Architecture Group Teleconference
18:00:45 [trackbot]
Date: 15 December 2011
18:01:16 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
18:01:46 [Zakim]
+Ashok_Malhotra
18:02:28 [Zakim]
+??P4
18:03:08 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller]
18:03:24 [Zakim]
+Yves
18:03:29 [noah]
zakim, +[ipcaller] is me
18:03:29 [Zakim]
sorry, noah, I do not recognize a party named '+[ipcaller]'
18:03:38 [noah]
zakim, [IPcaller] is me
18:03:38 [Zakim]
+noah; got it
18:04:01 [Zakim]
+Masinter
18:05:03 [Larry]
Larry has joined #tagmem
18:05:19 [plh]
plh has joined #tagmem
18:05:26 [ht]
ScribeNick: ht
18:05:32 [ht]
Scribe: Henry S. Thompson
18:05:36 [Zakim]
+Plh
18:05:36 [ht]
Chair: Noah Mendelsohn
18:05:43 [ht]
Meeting: TAG telcon
18:06:04 [ht]
Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/12/15-agenda.html
18:06:40 [ht]
Topic: Convene
18:07:07 [ht]
NM: There will be a call on 22 December
18:07:15 [ht]
NM: Regrets from YL
18:07:19 [ht]
JT: Regrets
18:07:32 [ht]
NM: LM, can you scribe?
18:07:35 [ht]
LM: Yes
18:07:44 [ht]
Topic: Minutes of last meeting
18:07:48 [noah]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/12/08-minutes
18:08:01 [ht]
RESOLUTION: Approve the minutes of telcon of 2011-12-08
18:08:12 [ht]
Topic: Administrivia
18:08:48 [ht]
Local arrangements at https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2011Dec/0004.html
18:09:17 [ht]
NM: HST, please arrange for a telephone bridge
18:09:21 [ht]
HST: Will do
18:10:02 [ht]
Agenda for f2f is building at http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/01/04-agenda
18:10:21 [ht]
NM: Mark Nottingham will join us for the SPDY discussion
18:10:55 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
18:11:20 [ht]
NM: Mark's time is limited, will have to fit in on Friday morning
18:11:41 [ht]
LM: Like to involve him on registries as well, as he's been taking the lead on the HAPPIANA work
18:12:13 [ht]
NM: Given time constraint, let's start the registries topic earlier, so we're well prepared to use Mark's time well
18:12:48 [ht]
NM: Wrt XML-HTML unification work, chasing with Norm Walsh
18:14:42 [ht]
Topic: HTML.next
18:15:27 [ht]
NM: This topic was suggested at the Edinburgh f2f, suggesting we should look at what involvement we might want to have wrt HTML after HTML5
18:15:48 [ht]
... PLH has joined us, and will do so again at the F2F to help
18:16:09 [ht]
... References to possibly relevant material in the agenda
18:16:11 [noah]
ACTION-637?
18:16:11 [trackbot]
ACTION-637 -- Noah Mendelsohn to ask PLH to join us in Dec. to bring us up to speed on HTML.next, and also join in F2F discussion -- due 2011-12-20 -- PENDINGREVIEW
18:16:11 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/637
18:16:18 [noah]
close ACTION-637
18:16:18 [trackbot]
ACTION-637 Ask PLH to join us in Dec. to bring us up to speed on HTML.next, and also join in F2F discussion closed
18:16:33 [ht]
NM: Most notably, a wiki at http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/next
18:16:58 [ht]
PLH: Some background on HTML.next
18:17:05 [ht]
... Not very far yet
18:17:30 [ht]
... The HTML WG is focussed on HTML5, given the number of open issues, some of which are tricky
18:17:56 [ht]
... So the discussions on .next have not gotten very far so far, most recently at TPAC
18:18:14 [ht]
PLH: Modularization of the spec. has been mentioned several times
18:18:27 [Larry]
Modularization work might benefit from some planning, even though it is premature to actually start with the work
18:18:28 [ht]
PLH: Some new features have been suggested
18:18:57 [ht]
PLH: Media ?? WG has brought some suggestions for some changes in their area
18:19:18 [ht]
PLH: A <data> element has been suggested by Ian Hickson
18:19:43 [Larry]
common protocol elements with other protocols as a big theme
18:20:10 [noah]
Larry, would you elaborate. Do mean things like HTTP-ish stuff in the <meta> tag, for example?
18:20:25 [ht]
NM: There's a sort of process issue about whether the future will be understood as working on a monolithic HTML6 or whether feature (group) by feature (group) will be specced through to REC independently
18:20:50 [Larry]
when we reviewed HTML a while back, we had a list of things which we filtered to leave out things that weren't timely
18:20:58 [ht]
PLH: Yes, but until we see a specific proposal, it's hard to know if/how this will work
18:21:59 [noah]
HT: A large architectural issue, which might arise, is whether there is any expectation within the WG (as opposed to rest of W3C) that they might want think about differing requirements for Web app delivery platform vs. browser.
18:22:35 [Larry]
I'd characterize what HT said was WebApps vs. HTML WG in W3C ... is that the right boundary in the long term
18:22:47 [ht]
NM: There's a background issue mentioned sometimes as to whether security has been well-treated in the current round
18:23:01 [ht]
NM: Doug Crockford has weighed in on this
18:23:05 [Larry]
JavaScript & API rules
18:23:09 [noah]
Doug Crockford on HTML and Security: http://security.sys-con.com/node/1544072
18:24:01 [noah]
Title of article is "Discoverer of JSON Recommends Suspension of HTML5"
18:24:02 [ht]
NM: This new spec. is chock-full of new features, and not only have you not done much to address existing issues, you've significantly expanded the surface area, and hence the risk of vulnerabilities
18:24:41 [noah]
He specifically criticizes the lack of clear resolution to cross site scripting problems, among others.
18:24:58 [ht]
PLH: But DC has not pointed to any specific vulnerabilities. An EU study [???] surveyed the spec. from this perspective, and identified some moderate issues, but nothing that stands out as a major problem
18:25:35 [ht]
LM: It's not clear that the kind of security review that is needed even _can_ be done
18:25:46 [noah]
Crockford is quoted as saying: "The XSS problem comes from two fundamental problems. The first is that the language of the web is unnecessarily complicated. HTML can be embedded in HTTP, and HTML can have embedded in it URLs, CSS, and JavaScript. "
18:25:59 [Larry]
s/evan _can_ be done/can be done properly/
18:26:05 [noah]
"JavaScript can be embedded in URLs and CSS. Each of these languages has different encoding, escapement, and commenting conventions. Statically determining that a piece of text will not become malicious when inserted into an HTML document is surprisingly difficult. There is a huge and growing set of techniques by which an attacker can disguise a payload that can avoid detection. New techniques are discovered all the time, and usually the attackers find them
18:26:12 [ht]
PLH: It's always possible that there are holes, but we're trying hard not to let that happen
18:26:19 [noah]
"The second problem is that all scripts on a page run with the same authority. "
18:26:38 [ht]
s/even _can_ be done/can be done properly/
18:27:36 [ht]
LM: When we discussed HTML issues a while ago, we left some things off the list because they weren't timely -- should we pull them up again?
18:28:00 [ht]
NM: I can't easily find that list -- someone needs to take an action to find the list and prepare a discussion
18:28:17 [ht]
... so that we don't waste time
18:28:34 [ht]
LM: I will find the list, if someone else will do the review
18:29:42 [plh]
--> http://www.enisa.europa.eu/act/application-security/web-security/a-security-analysis-of-next-generation-web-standards A Security Analysis of Next Generation Web Standards
18:29:43 [ht]
NM: I will take an action to find the list and email a link to the group
18:30:05 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to try and find list of review issues relating to HTML5 from earlier discussions
18:30:05 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-641 - Try and find list of review issues relating to HTML5 from earlier discussions [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2011-12-22].
18:30:07 [plh]
q+
18:30:14 [noah]
ack mext
18:30:14 [ht]
NM: After that, I'll wait for specific requests for action wrt something there.
18:30:43 [ht]
PLH: That security review [link] covers not just HTML5, but also related specs.
18:31:04 [ht]
... It is often, as was the case with CSS, that it's combinations of specs that create security risks
18:31:07 [JeniT]
q+ to ask if there are items for HTML.next that overlap with other WG's previous work?
18:31:10 [Larry]
perhaps ability to to security review is a goal for modularization
18:31:16 [noah]
q?
18:31:27 [ht]
PLH: The CSS risk was not CSS alone, but in combination with the DOM
18:31:36 [noah]
q+ to ask if review really covered Doug C.'s concern
18:31:37 [noah]
ack next
18:31:40 [noah]
ack next
18:31:42 [Zakim]
JeniT, you wanted to ask if there are items for HTML.next that overlap with other WG's previous work?
18:32:05 [ht]
JT: From what you've seen about possible HTML.next features, is there potential overlap with other WGs?
18:32:17 [ht]
... Because that's where problems have arisen in the past
18:32:23 [Larry]
q+ to talk about modularization guideilnes, reasons for, requirements for... examples of where modularizaiton helps, things to avoid... is this something TAG could talk about
18:32:34 [noah]
zakim, who is talking?
18:32:46 [Zakim]
noah, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Plh (31%)
18:32:52 [noah]
ack next
18:32:53 [ht]
PLH: Not that I'm aware of, but only in-so-far as we often don't have WGs in the areas that have been mentioned
18:32:54 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to ask if review really covered Doug C.'s concern
18:33:34 [ht]
NM: PLH mentioned the existing study, but DC's interview does mention some specifics
18:33:40 [ht]
NM: For example
18:33:49 [noah]
Doug Crockford (in article linked above): "HTML can be embedded in HTTP, and HTML can have embedded in it URLs, CSS, and JavaScript. JavaScript can be embedded in URLs and CSS. Each of these languages has different encoding, escapement, and commenting conventions. Statically determining that a piece of text will not become malicious when inserted into an HTML document is surprisingly difficult. T"
18:34:14 [Yves]
http://www.contextis.co.uk/resources/blog/webgl/poc/index.html for an example of shaders timing attack.
18:34:57 [noah]
q?
18:35:02 [ht]
NM: Is that the kind of thing which that EU survey looked at? We're carrying a huge historical overhang which it's hard to untangle, or get away from
18:35:03 [noah]
ack next
18:35:04 [Zakim]
Larry, you wanted to talk about modularization guideilnes, reasons for, requirements for... examples of where modularizaiton helps, things to avoid... is this something TAG could
18:35:06 [Larry]
for example, our recent finding on web applications and URIs for application state -- could we get that into HTML.next
18:35:07 [Zakim]
... talk about
18:35:21 [ht]
PLH: I don't know whether that issue was covered by the survey
18:35:43 [ht]
LM: One of the requirements for modularization is that it makes security reviews _easier_.
18:36:15 [ht]
LM: That needs to feed in to any discussion of _why_ modularize, and _how_, which the TAG might contribute to
18:36:22 [noah]
I agree, but I think another way of saying this is: separation of concerns is a good characteristic of a design. If that's achieved, then one benefit will be that specs can be reviewed in pieces.
18:37:02 [noah]
NM: Didn't quite get that.
18:37:37 [ht]
LM: We've recently published a REC on Application State, and are headed for something on API Minimization
18:37:48 [noah]
HT: He said, that we've published some things that weren't well timed to affect last year's work. Things like Storage and API work in the TAG could be focused on impacting html.next
18:37:54 [ht]
... Those should feed in early to get the chance of impact
18:38:04 [noah]
q?
18:38:30 [ht]
s/get the chance/improve the chance/
18:38:58 [ht]
PLH: There is very low interest in the WebApps WG in working on the Web Storage API
18:39:22 [ht]
... But it will go forward simply because it is so widely used
18:39:41 [noah]
PLH: Momentum is moving toward IndexDB
18:39:43 [ht]
... Even though there is a widely known bug, in the area of concurrent access to the API
18:40:11 [ht]
PLH, AM: It's called out in the current spec. draft, in fact
18:40:47 [noah]
q+ to talk about TAG work on storage
18:40:53 [ht]
AM: People have been saying the Web Storage is a very simple API, IndexDB is more complicated, they don't _need_ that complexity.
18:41:10 [noah]
ack next
18:41:12 [ht]
PLH: It will get done, but it won't get improved or extended
18:41:12 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to talk about TAG work on storage
18:41:50 [ht]
NM: The TAG has discussed the whole question of client-side storage, and whether we should gear up to look at this area
18:42:32 [ht]
NM: The Web started out pretty stateless, then along came cookies, and now various forms of client-side persistent data, Web Storage, IndexDB, etc. . .
18:43:08 [ht]
NM: I think the TAG's concern should be at the architectural level, comparing these mechanisms to a local HTTP caching proxy
18:43:24 [ht]
... and looking at the question of accessing it via an index rather than a URI
18:43:48 [ht]
NM: We need to find out what people _want_ from these, that they can't get from a caching proxy
18:43:58 [ht]
... and maybe feed back to developers
18:44:25 [ht]
NM: So even if Web Storage isn't complicated, or likely to be extended, there may be work for the TAG to do
18:44:39 [noah]
?
18:44:59 [ht]
YL: We did also review the relation of App Cache to
18:45:24 [Yves]
App Cache to the HTTP caching model
18:45:42 [Yves]
and Ashok wanted to make a relation between caches and storage as well
18:45:42 [ht]
AM: In our recent document, we looked also at the relation of App Cache to Web Storage
18:46:04 [Ashok]
s/document/discussion/
18:46:24 [ht]
NM: Not sure how much we need to devote to this going forward
18:46:43 [ht]
... but without more evidence of new ideas, we may have to reconsider using f2f time
18:47:09 [ht]
NM: Thank you Philippe for joining us
18:47:32 [Zakim]
-Plh
18:47:35 [plh]
plh has left #tagmem
18:48:00 [ht]
Topic: F2F Planning
18:48:06 [noah]
List of topics: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/01/04-agenda.html#agendaInProgress
18:49:21 [ht]
NM: Embedded in agenda format, but focus on timeline fixed points, and Working List of Agenda Items
18:49:34 [ht]
AM: 7:30 end on Friday?
18:49:50 [ht]
NM: No, usual goal -- aim for 4 p.m.
18:50:34 [ht]
s/7:30/11:30/
18:50:40 [ht]
NM: What's up with Privacy?
18:50:52 [ht]
AM: Not yet connected with DA on this
18:51:03 [JeniT]
+q to ask to add brainstorm on bold messages on copyright & brief feedback on microdata/RDFa
18:51:49 [ht]
AM: I have written a short doc't, arguing that although the W3C now has a Do Not Track WG, there are other problem areas which are worrying
18:52:20 [ht]
AM: But it's not clear what W3C can do in these areas
18:52:52 [ht]
... Perhaps we should make a few statements on such things: Net Neutrality, ???
18:53:19 [noah]
HT: Questions: you said "we" a few times...we the TAG or we the W3C.
18:53:21 [noah]
AM: W3C
18:54:52 [noah]
ack next
18:54:54 [Zakim]
JeniT, you wanted to ask to add brainstorm on bold messages on copyright & brief feedback on microdata/RDFa
18:55:01 [ht]
NM: Maybe this will fit in no problem, will see how the schedule goes
18:55:48 [ht]
JT: Previous agenda discussion included, wrt Publishing and Agenda on the Web, there is now probably _not_ going to be a new document, because we haven't had any legal input
18:56:24 [ht]
... But we _did_ talk about having a brainstorming session on what kinds of punchy short outputs we should aim for
18:56:39 [ht]
JT: This is a good thing for f2f
18:56:42 [ht]
HST: +1
18:56:43 [noah]
JT: I would like to have a brainstorming on bold messages on copyright and linking]
18:56:44 [ht]
AM: +1
18:56:52 [noah]
s/linking]/linking
18:57:09 [ht]
AM: Also need to think about how they should be delivered
18:57:22 [ht]
NM: Right, I'll plan to do that
18:57:49 [ht]
NM: Aiming to wrap the agenda in the coming week, please note
18:58:26 [ht]
JT: I would like to have a brief slot to bring us up to date on the Microdata/RDFa situation
18:58:32 [ht]
NM: 30 minutes?
18:58:38 [ht]
JT: Yes
18:58:46 [ht]
NM: 10 minute update, 20 minute discussion
18:59:08 [ht]
JT: I'm not aware of any specific thing we need to do, but did want to report
18:59:32 [ht]
NM: There are several major document promises wrt preparation time before the f2f
18:59:37 [ht]
... So the sooner the better
18:59:55 [ht]
... Please get behind this and push if you're on the hook
19:00:19 [ht]
Topic: ACTION-509, Response to RDFa WG
19:00:37 [ht]
NM: Are we good to go here?
19:00:58 [ht]
JT: Yes, given recent agreement to the amended wording, I think we're ready to go
19:01:05 [ht]
NM: No objections? None.
19:01:12 [noah]
Can we record a resolution pointing to the email with the agreed text?
19:01:16 [ht]
JT: I'll go ahead then
19:01:20 [noah]
Since this is communication with an outside group
19:02:14 [JeniT]
Final email in thread is http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Dec/0077.html
19:03:13 [ht]
RESOLUTION: TAG agrees that Jeni Tennison will send the text in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Dec/0026.html to the RDFa WG and thereby close ACTION-509
19:03:15 [JeniT]
In some of the examples below we have used IRIs with fragment
19:03:17 [JeniT]
identifiers that are local to the document containing the RDFa
19:03:18 [JeniT]
fragment identifiers shown (e.g., 'about="#me"'). This idiom, which
19:03:20 [JeniT]
is also used in RDF/XML [RDF-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR] and other RDF
19:03:21 [JeniT]
serializations, gives a simple way to 'mint' new IRIs for entities
19:03:23 [JeniT]
described by RDFa and therefore contributes considerably to the
19:03:24 [JeniT]
expressive power of RDFa. The precise meaning of IRIs which include
19:03:26 [JeniT]
fragment identifiers when they appear in RDF graphs is given in
19:03:27 [JeniT]
Section 7 of [RDF-CONCEPTS]. To ensure that such fragment identifiers
19:03:29 [JeniT]
can be interpreted correctly, media type registrations for markup
19:03:31 [JeniT]
languages that incorporate RDFa should directly or indirectly
19:03:32 [JeniT]
reference this specification (RDFa Core).
19:04:29 [ht]
Topic: ACTION-631 Microdata referenced from HTML5 spec
19:04:30 [noah]
ACTION-631?
19:04:31 [trackbot]
ACTION-631 -- Jeni Tennison to suggest how is best to deal with explicit reference to only Microdata (not RDFa) from HTML spec -- due 2011-11-18 -- PENDINGREVIEW
19:04:31 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/631
19:04:55 [ht]
NM: Near consensus that not much needs to be done
19:05:15 [ht]
JT: At the moment the HTML5 mentions neither Microdata or RDFa
19:05:48 [ht]
... But that means there's no FYN route from the soon-to-be text/html media type definition to either of these
19:06:10 [ht]
s/mentions/spec mentions/
19:06:11 [Larry]
maybe this belongs in the MIME document
19:06:43 [ht]
NM: No action on FYN for HTML5, I don't think
19:07:15 [ht]
HST: Needs to be a specific action wrt HTML5
19:07:19 [noah]
HT: I think this needs to be against HTML5 - unconvinced focusing on mime doc now is the right way to go
19:08:06 [ht]
JT: I'll take an action
19:08:10 [ht]
LM: I'd like to help
19:08:33 [noah]
. ACTION: Jeni with help from Larry to make plan of action for getting "follow your nose" for microdata and RDFA from HTML5
19:08:40 [noah]
. ACTION: Jeni with help from Larry to make plan of action for getting "follow your nose" for (at least) microdata and RDFA from HTML5
19:08:59 [Larry]
I think we need to address the issue of media type registration in the compound specifications and media type registration and use....
19:09:29 [ht]
NM: Due date just ahead of the f2f, so at least we can discuss this there
19:09:58 [ht]
JT: It might also make sense to discuss it in the HTML.next session, as it's larger than just microdata and RDFa
19:10:15 [ht]
s/this there/this there by expanding the microdata nd RDFa session/
19:10:46 [ht]
NM: Doesn't really fit with HTML.next -- time frame wrong, for one thing
19:10:55 [ht]
JT: It was mostly that I was hoping PLH would be there
19:11:25 [ht]
NM: OK, I'll expand both the time slot _and_ the topic for what was called above the Microdata and RDFa reporting session
19:11:33 [noah]
ACTION: Jeni with help from Larry to make plan of action for getting "follow your nose" for (at least) microdata and RDFA from HTML5 Due: 2 January 2012
19:11:34 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-642 - With help from Larry to make plan of action for getting "follow your nose" for (at least) microdata and RDFA from HTML5 Due: 2 January 2012 [on Jeni Tennison - due 2011-12-22].
19:11:54 [noah]
ACTION-642 Due 2012-01-02
19:11:54 [trackbot]
ACTION-642 With help from Larry to make plan of action for getting "follow your nose" for (at least) microdata and RDFA from HTML5 Due: 2 January 2012 due date now 2012-01-02
19:12:19 [ht]
NM: So, close ACTION-631?
19:12:21 [noah]
close ACTION-631
19:12:21 [trackbot]
ACTION-631 Suggest how is best to deal with explicit reference to only Microdata (not RDFa) from HTML spec closed
19:12:25 [noah]
ACTION-614?
19:12:25 [trackbot]
ACTION-614 -- Jeni Tennison to report on progress relating to RDFa and Microdata -- due 2011-12-15 -- OPEN
19:12:25 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/614
19:12:55 [noah]
ACTION-614 Due 2012-01-06
19:12:55 [trackbot]
ACTION-614 Report on progress relating to RDFa and Microdata due date now 2012-01-06
19:13:25 [ht]
Topic: Pending review actions
19:13:27 [noah]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/pendingreview
19:13:41 [noah]
ACTION-528?
19:13:41 [trackbot]
ACTION-528 -- Henry Thompson to create and get consensus on a product page and tracker product page for persistence of names -- due 2011-11-29 -- PENDINGREVIEW
19:13:41 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/528
19:14:08 [noah]
HT: Was planning to discuss minutes of the workshop today, but someone asked for more time
19:14:18 [noah]
ACTION-588?
19:14:19 [trackbot]
ACTION-588 -- Noah Mendelsohn to work with Larry to update mime-web product page Due 2011-08-18 -- due 2011-12-13 -- PENDINGREVIEW
19:14:19 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/588
19:14:22 [noah]
Overtaken by ACTION-636 (Noah successfully fobs this off on Larry). Marking PENDING REVIEW.
19:14:43 [noah]
close ACTION-588
19:14:43 [trackbot]
ACTION-588 Work with Larry to update mime-web product page Due 2011-08-18 closed
19:14:58 [noah]
ACTION-625?
19:14:58 [trackbot]
ACTION-625 -- Noah Mendelsohn to schedule followup discussion of http://www.w3.org/wiki/HttpRange14Options (per agreement in Santa Clara) -- due 2011-12-21 -- PENDINGREVIEW
19:14:58 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/625
19:16:38 [noah]
HT: There is a plan we hatched in Edinburgh
19:16:55 [noah]
Include ACTION-625 in F2F agendum on URI Definition Discovery -- new work to be available for discussion
19:17:07 [noah]
ACTION-639?
19:17:07 [trackbot]
ACTION-639 -- Noah Mendelsohn to invite Mark Nottingham to SPDY/HTTP F2F session -- due 2011-12-15 -- PENDINGREVIEW
19:17:07 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/639
19:17:08 [ht]
s/Edinburgh/Edinburgh, JAR will be letting us all know about it/
19:17:13 [noah]
close ACTION-639
19:17:14 [trackbot]
ACTION-639 Invite Mark Nottingham to SPDY/HTTP F2F session closed
19:17:58 [ht]
Topic: Overdue actions
19:18:14 [noah]
ACTION-560?
19:18:14 [trackbot]
ACTION-560 -- Henry Thompson to review HTML polyglot last call Due 2011-06-06 -- due 2011-12-06 -- OPEN
19:18:14 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/560
19:20:06 [ht]
HST: Some progress behind the scenes, but nothing definite to report on yet
19:20:55 [ht]
ACTION-560 due 2011-12-20
19:20:55 [trackbot]
ACTION-560 Review HTML polyglot last call Due 2011-06-06 due date now 2011-12-20
19:21:19 [noah]
ACTION-635?
19:21:19 [trackbot]
ACTION-635 -- Henry Thompson to update product page for Frag IDS and Mime types, to include realistic goals and dates -- due 2011-12-08 -- OPEN
19:21:20 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/635
19:21:36 [ht]
HST: I'll scope a session on this for the f2f, in case it's needed
19:22:09 [ht]
ACTION-635 due 2011-12-20
19:22:09 [trackbot]
ACTION-635 Update product page for Frag IDS and Mime types, to include realistic goals and dates due date now 2011-12-20
19:23:08 [ht]
HST: The updated page will not promise anything in time for the f2f
19:23:14 [noah]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/overdue?sort=owner
19:23:30 [noah]
ACTION-501?
19:23:30 [trackbot]
ACTION-501 -- Ashok Malhotra to follow up on whether GeoLocation finds reasonable answer on giving permission per site/app etc [self-assigned] -- due 2011-12-06 -- OPEN
19:23:30 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/501
19:23:42 [noah]
ACTION-633?
19:23:42 [trackbot]
ACTION-633 -- Ashok Malhotra to drive TAG review of Geolocation last call Due 2011-12-06 -- due 2011-12-06 -- OPEN
19:23:42 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/633
19:23:46 [ht]
NM: It _really_ matters that Product pages really need to tell the truth about when substantial documents will be forthcoming
19:24:16 [ht]
AM: I think these are done, I sent email about them, saying the spec. looked OK to me and no action was required
19:24:26 [noah]
NM: Right, we need that especially as input to the F2F...otherwise we will burn time there editing the product pages to reflect earlier decision
19:24:35 [Larry]
+1
19:24:37 [noah]
close ACTION-501
19:24:37 [trackbot]
ACTION-501 Follow up on whether GeoLocation finds reasonable answer on giving permission per site/app etc [self-assigned] closed
19:24:42 [noah]
close ACTION-633
19:24:42 [trackbot]
ACTION-633 Drive TAG review of Geolocation last call Due 2011-12-06 closed
19:25:13 [ht]
AM: I've done my half of ACTION-634
19:25:26 [noah]
ACTION-634?
19:25:26 [trackbot]
ACTION-634 -- Noah Mendelsohn to with help from Noah to publish http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/IdentifyingApplicationState-20111130 as a TAG Finding -- due 2011-12-20 -- OPEN
19:25:26 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/634
19:25:27 [ht]
... Waiting on NM for the other half
19:25:28 [Larry]
I will bump the dates on my open actions
19:25:37 [noah]
ACTION-632?
19:25:37 [trackbot]
ACTION-632 -- Ashok Malhotra to frame issues around client-side storage work Due 2011-12-06 -- due 2011-12-06 -- OPEN
19:25:37 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/632
19:26:00 [ht]
NM: I do want to talk about this at the f2f, so need it before then
19:26:06 [noah]
ACTION-632 Due 2012-01-02
19:26:07 [trackbot]
ACTION-632 Frame issues around client-side storage work Due 2011-12-06 due date now 2012-01-02
19:27:27 [ht]
LM: I have been working on xxx, and would welcome review from everyone
19:28:19 [Larry]
i've been making good progress, i'm ready for 1-1 review of the document i'm working on, but not in a mode where you read something and give me feedback days later...
19:28:43 [ht]
NM: Adjourned
19:29:01 [Larry]
i posted a couple of "uncool URLs must change" links
19:29:06 [Zakim]
-Ashok_Malhotra
19:29:08 [Zakim]
-noah
19:29:09 [Zakim]
-Masinter
19:29:09 [Zakim]
-Yves
19:29:10 [Zakim]
-JeniT
19:29:12 [Zakim]
-ht
19:29:13 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()1:00PM has ended
19:29:15 [Zakim]
Attendees were JeniT, Ashok_Malhotra, ht, Yves, noah, Masinter, Plh
19:29:17 [Larry]
and HTTP status cats as a new registry
19:29:34 [ht]
+1 for HTTP status cats
19:29:48 [Larry]
every new registry entry SHOULD come with a picture of a cat illustrating the meaning of the registry entry
19:30:30 [Larry]
cv http://www.ted.com/talks/john_bohannon_dance_vs_powerpoint_a_modest_proposal.html "Modest proposal: no powerpoint, illustrate your talk with dance"
20:08:52 [ht]
ht has joined #tagmem
21:09:30 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tagmem
22:00:32 [Larry]
Larry has joined #tagmem
22:03:22 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
22:10:15 [trackbot]
trackbot has joined #tagmem