IRC log of tagmem on 2012-01-05

Timestamps are in UTC.

00:45:14 [JeniT]
JeniT has joined #tagmem
01:01:30 [JeniT]
JeniT has joined #tagmem
01:25:50 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
03:08:42 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
03:27:04 [JeniT]
JeniT has joined #tagmem
03:32:28 [JeniT]
JeniT has joined #tagmem
09:42:42 [darobin]
darobin has joined #tagmem
12:43:00 [darobin]
darobin has joined #tagmem
13:13:07 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tagmem
13:26:57 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
13:42:45 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
13:42:47 [glenn]
glenn has joined #tagmem
13:53:05 [masinter]
masinter has joined #tagmem
13:58:54 [JeniT]
JeniT has joined #tagmem
14:00:55 [jar]
jar has joined #tagmem
14:01:11 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #tagmem
14:01:18 [jar]
scribe: Jonathan Rees
14:01:21 [jar]
scribenick: jar
14:01:50 [timbl]
Larry, document RDF is at
14:01:57 [noah]
zakim, who is here?
14:01:57 [Zakim]
sorry, noah, I don't know what conference this is
14:01:58 [Zakim]
On IRC I see jar, JeniT, masinter, glenn, noah, timbl, darobin, RRSAgent, plinss_, trackbot, Yves
14:01:59 [plinss]
plinss has joined #tagmem
14:02:09 [noah]
zakim, who is here?
14:02:12 [Zakim]
On the phone I see W3C, GlennAdams
14:02:14 [Zakim]
On IRC I see plinss, Zakim, jar, JeniT, masinter, glenn, noah, timbl, darobin, RRSAgent, plinss_, trackbot, Yves
14:02:36 [jar]
agenda review
14:03:44 [jar]
14:05:34 [jar]
F2F scheduling
14:06:18 [jar]
next one is april 2-4 south of france
14:09:09 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
14:09:33 [ht]
ht has joined #tagmem
14:10:12 [Zakim]
14:11:59 [glenn]
I have a conflict for week of Jun 11-15 should I be elected
14:11:59 [ht]
I cannot do 25 or 29 may
14:12:10 [ht]
should I be re-elected
14:12:38 [noah]
We are talking about 12-14 June in Cambridge, to meet Tim's preferences. Can you do it?
14:12:44 [ht]
14:13:07 [glenn]
I will be in London that week
14:14:35 [jar]
The TAG plans to meet 12-14 June, but don't make travel plans yet since we need to consult with new members
14:15:36 [jar]
ht: It would be good for every TAG member to touch base with an IETF meeting, IMO
14:16:40 [jar]
LM: Let's talk to Mark N about liaison when he's here. Might be good to interact with ISOC too
14:17:08 [jar]
LM: maye collaborate around extensibility
14:17:12 [jar]
14:17:33 [masinter]
suggestions for IETF general topics: (a) ask MNot on Friday (b) IAB on extensibility, (c) ISOC members on legal impact.
14:17:35 [Zakim]
14:18:15 [Zakim]
14:18:19 [jar]
topic: Administration
14:18:26 [masinter]
suggestions for individual TAG members of relevant IETF working groups: RTC, IRI, URNbis, HTTPbis, websec. If you attend, be prepared to have read relevant documents being discussed
14:18:27 [jar]
topic: Microdata + RDFa
14:18:37 [JeniT]
14:19:20 [jar]
JT: We had wiki page set up since September. 2 documents came out of this
14:19:22 [JeniT]
14:20:06 [jar]
… HTML data guide - advice on how to do data in HTML, when to use which mechanism
14:20:21 [jar]
… divided by target audiences
14:21:15 [jar]
Publishers: how to mix vocabularies, how to mix syntaxes - what do you have to be aware of re possible conflicts
14:21:29 [jar]
s/Publishers:/JT: Publishers:/
14:22:19 [jar]
JT: Next section is for consumers - what syntax should you consume, how to deal with mixed input
14:23:08 [jar]
JT: 3rd section for vocab authors. Extending existing vocabularies to suit new requirements, designing vocabs for each kind of syntax and that work across the syntaxes
14:23:32 [jar]
… The plan is to publish this as a SWIG note in January
14:24:43 [jar]
LM: What I'm missing is anything about whole-document metadata - DC, XMP - I know this is a different problem, but some ack of this would be nice
14:25:51 [jar]
LM: The HTML meta tag seems related. The document ought to say something about this other stuff, if only to put it out of scope.
14:26:27 [jar]
LM: references so that people are directed to the right place (if they want to know about it)
14:27:05 [jar]
TBL: question about history of RDFa
14:28:02 [jar]
TBL: Dublin Core was persuaded to adopt RDF with the understanding that RDFa would be coming along later
14:29:23 [jar]
NM: Didn't the current effort start with the announcement of ? How have things progressed since then?
14:30:08 [masinter]
"whole document metadata" is a separate but related topic but likely to be confused
14:30:14 [jar]
JT: RDFa Lite is now a WD, has adopted support for it
14:31:03 [masinter]
14:31:17 [jar]
JT: Google already recognized a wide variety of markups, and was a statement of a preferred form
14:32:13 [jar]
NM: It would be nice to be able to tell the community what the TAG's role was in this
14:32:16 [masinter]
also: embedding XMP in HTML
14:32:32 [timbl]
2003-12-15 XFN 1.0 launched by Tantek Çelik[1], Eric Meyer[2], Matthew Mullenweg[3]
14:33:00 [timbl]
a b "XHTML and RDF W3C Note 14 February 2004". World Wide Web Consortium. 2004-02-14. Retrieved 2007-12-27.
14:33:18 [jar]
ashok: So there wasn't a groundswell to reduce the number of formats? Why not?
14:34:19 [jar]
LM: I thought the big difference had to do with namespaces and extensibility? You can use namespaces in RDFa but not in microdata?
14:35:41 [masinter]
i'm also concerned about relationship between embedded metadata in linked images and metadata in links
14:35:44 [jar]
JT: Not really. In microdata you can have multiple independent event vocabularies
14:36:36 [jar]
JT: In microdata syntax you can't say a single item is two things from two different vocabularies… but you can always nest
14:37:04 [JeniT]
14:37:09 [jar]
TBL: What about getting triples out HTML documents?
14:37:19 [jar]
JT: THat's the second document.
14:38:24 [jar]
… There were problems with the HTML5 mapping of microdata to RDF
14:38:41 [masinter]
for example,"> deals with relationship. For example, img src="something.jpeg" might want to link data about the image in the HTML, to ... override? supplant? be resolved against ? metadata ... may need something of the scope of
14:38:52 [jar]
… The problem is it's impossible to generate idiomatic RDF without some knowledge of the microdata vocabulary.
14:39:16 [masinter]
would like to make sure review with happens
14:39:37 [jar]
… It doesn't make distinctions that RDF makes. E.g. what about ordering of multiple values? Microdata is always ordered, but in idiomatic RDF it would depend on vocabulary
14:40:05 [jar]
JT: AFAIK everyone using microdata is using
14:40:21 [jar]
TBL: Could you annotate the schema?
14:40:43 [jar]
JT: Somewhere, somehow, there needs to be a registry that provides this information
14:41:50 [JeniT]
14:42:00 [JeniT]
"Except if otherwise specified by that specification, the URLs given as the item types should not be automatically dereferenced."
14:44:02 [masinter]
14:44:46 [masinter]
q+ to ask that the HTML data guide address other workflows around data management in HTML: merging HTML from multiple sources, merging HTML data with data from other sources
14:45:19 [noah]
We need to wrap this discussion in 2 minutes
14:45:58 [jar]
jar: asking why there needs to be a canonical mapping for microdata (as opposed to lots of mappings)
14:46:07 [jar]
noah: Cost/benefit
14:46:32 [jar]
TBL: Scaling and reuse
14:46:46 [noah]
ack next
14:46:48 [Zakim]
masinter, you wanted to ask that the HTML data guide address other workflows around data management in HTML: merging HTML from multiple sources, merging HTML data with data from
14:46:51 [Zakim]
... other sources
14:46:52 [JeniT]
14:47:06 [noah]
zakim, close the queue
14:47:06 [Zakim]
ok, noah, the speaker queue is closed
14:47:36 [JeniT]
I think that's expanding the scope which I don't want to do
14:47:42 [jar]
LM: metadata about the linked object in the referring document - this is a common workflow - possible conflicts - might be worth calling this out
14:47:47 [JeniT]
That might be useful, but it's outside scope
14:48:14 [Norm]
Norm has joined #tagmem
14:48:18 [masinter]
if it is out of scope, then please note that it hasn't been addressed and hsould be before the analysis is complete
14:48:27 [jar]
NM: Thanks Jeni
14:48:28 [plh]
plh has joined #tagmem
14:49:49 [jar]
JT: There's so much to say about this, we had to keep the scope quite narrow
14:49:58 [jar]
14:50:36 [Zakim]
14:50:47 [jar]
nm: I'd like to know what we ought to be doing re in the next 3-6 months
14:50:48 [timbl]
I wonder why "This section is non-normative.
14:50:48 [timbl]
This document describes a means of transforming HTML containing microdata into RDF. "
14:51:52 [JeniT]
14:52:17 [jar]
PLH: Mike Smith did some work since we last spoke about this. New list [of features], which is interesting
14:52:48 [jar]
PLH: E.g. datagrid got removed from html5, deferred
14:53:17 [jar]
PLH: Input mode attribute, proposal from Microsoft
14:53:32 [jar]
NM: Looks like none of this is deep
14:53:50 [jar]
PLH: There will be no upgrades to the HTML5 parsers
14:54:11 [jar]
NM: That's important
14:54:11 [masinter]
modularization of the specification?
14:54:18 [glenn]
the proposed "element" and "template" element types appear somewhat generic
14:54:23 [timbl]
14:54:52 [Zakim]
14:55:16 [jar]
PLH: intent element - from device API WG - for head - this is a problem since a parser treats unrecognized element as transition to body
14:55:21 [masinter]
which of are in scope?
14:55:51 [masinter]
and my own perspective:
14:55:58 [jar]
TBL: This has always been a bug… unrecognized head elements ought to be ignored, otherwise there's no extensibility
14:56:28 [jar]
PLH: intent is thus an example of an extension that's NOT going to be considered for now
14:56:47 [jar]
… ('intent' is a misnomer)
14:57:39 [jar]
NM: it has a pub/sub feel to it
14:58:18 [jar]
PLH: Arrival of speech on the web is going to be a big item. Speech incubator group is looking at it
14:59:17 [noah]
14:59:39 [jar]
PLH: translate - if you don't use namespaces, that's OK, but [scribe missed]
15:00:11 [jar]
… translate will be part of HTML, but will be extended further
15:00:42 [plh]
--> Multilingual Web Working Group Charter
15:00:51 [jar]
NM: Before ratholing, remember the goal is what the TAG should be doing
15:02:22 [jar]
JAR: What about javascript related changes?
15:03:03 [jar]
PLH: Being able to control adaptive streaming algorithm - it's a set of APIs
15:03:53 [jar]
PLH: Javascript modules is not part of this discussion
15:05:27 [jar]
LM: What I see is sets of features, which seems appropriate for the WG
15:05:45 [glenn]
plh? impact from media related proposals in ?
15:06:23 [jar]
… at TPAC there was an interesting panel … architectural conflicts between SVG and HTML, things left dangling, references to evolving specifications
15:07:12 [jar]
… these are not features, but they are changes to the specification and affects evolution of the language. Maybe the WG doesn't want to work on this, as this is painful
15:07:21 [jar]
15:07:46 [jar]
s/SVG/SVG (etc.)/
15:08:05 [jar]
… might the TAG be able to make that kind of work easier to do?
15:08:35 [jar]
PLH: SVG and HTML video element conflict will be addressed by the WGs
15:09:08 [glenn]
plh? accessibility issues from use of canvas ? is this in scope ?
15:09:09 [jar]
PLH: there is interest in making the technologies work well together
15:09:25 [jar]
LM: color management
15:09:27 [Zakim]
15:09:54 [jar]
PLH: this is happening naturally, since implementors don't like to implement the same thing twice with variation
15:09:59 [Zakim]
15:10:09 [Zakim]
15:10:10 [jar]
LM: But that kind of pressure is not neceesarily enough
15:10:20 [Zakim]
15:11:39 [jar]
PLH: CSS extensibility story has been falling apart. Market successes drive out minority features...
15:12:08 [jar]
PL: If an id contains a - then it will never become part of CSS (this includes vendor prefixes)
15:12:43 [jar]
PL: When people started using vendor prefixes for experimental purposes that was a problem
15:12:51 [jar]
TBL: Pain
15:13:39 [jar]
PL: Any vendor who does [that] will get a whack from the CSS WG
15:13:57 [jar]
LM: The question is who to blame when something goes wrong
15:14:40 [jar]
PLH: I introduced this topic because CSS seems to have the best extensibility story for experimental features
15:15:13 [jar]
PL: The best approach is for the CSS WG to drive new features to rec as fast as possible, to avoid vendor prefixes
15:15:36 [jar]
LM: Vendor prefixes should have a year, and old features should not be used
15:16:11 [masinter]
What can the TAG do? Extensibility, mdularization, references... architectural features
15:16:31 [glenn]
what is the record for attaining REC by CSS WG? 2-3 out of 20-30 specs? some specs going on 10+ years
15:16:46 [jar]
NM: XML namespaces often feel like vendor prefixes. There's not a good way to say what the implementation path is for [missed]
15:17:23 [jar]
LM: How can the TAG help? Not with the feature list. What about architectural issues, like extensibility, maybe narrowly focussed.
15:18:06 [jar]
PLH: Because no namespace support, we're trying to keep track of new elements being introduced
15:18:14 [jar]
… [in HTML]
15:19:02 [jar]
TBL: HTML parser is a big black box, not driven by tables, no grammar - so how to add new elements?
15:19:06 [masinter]
timbl: table driven parser? Grammar? If you're adding new elements, where will they be added?
15:19:36 [jar]
PLH: Some parts of parser are going to be unchanged - error recovery
15:19:47 [DKA]
DKA has joined #tagmem
15:20:13 [jar]
LM: What about HTML5 issues closed for lack of change proposal? Reconsidering them for HTML6?
15:20:36 [jar]
PLH: Correct, this can happen.
15:21:28 [JeniT]
15:22:34 [noah]
15:22:34 [trackbot]
ACTION-600 -- Daniel Appelquist to report to TAG on goals, scope and progress to date for work -- due 2011-10-25 -- OPEN
15:22:35 [trackbot]
15:22:55 [jar]
JT: Has there emerged a kind of scope for Or timeline?
15:23:05 [noah]
DKA: No progress on ACTION-600
15:23:17 [noah]
NM: I think we'll probably reassign ACTION-600 given that Dan is leaving the TAG, let's see how the rest of this discussion goes.
15:23:24 [noah]
15:23:24 [trackbot]
ACTION-641 -- Noah Mendelsohn to try and find list of review issues relating to HTML5 from earlier discussions -- due 2012-01-17 -- OPEN
15:23:24 [trackbot]
15:23:26 [jar]
PLH: Should be more rapid this time
15:23:47 [noah]
I'm sorry I didn't have time to get to ACTION-641. It's due mid-Jan. Not sure if I'll get to it, but I'll try. Help would be welcome.
15:24:58 [jar]
PLH: There's the issue of modularizing the spec. To some extent this happens because different people are working on different parts
15:26:17 [glenn]
negative impact of modularization is cross-dependencies between modules and time lines for completion of dependencies
15:26:38 [jar]
15:27:06 [masinter`]
masinter` has joined #tagmem
15:27:18 [noah]
15:27:18 [trackbot]
ACTION-600 -- Daniel Appelquist to report to TAG on goals, scope and progress to date for work -- due 2011-10-25 -- OPEN
15:27:18 [trackbot]
15:27:27 [jar]
NM: The TAG isn't looking for work, the question is whether we can be of any use
15:28:08 [glenn]
separately, there are core semantics of HTML5 spec (such as event queue semantics) that are being normatively referenced by many other specs in other WGs (e.g., WebApps)
15:28:49 [glenn]
its becoming quite a nest of dependencies with little architectural planning for the impact
15:29:28 [jar]
LM: We're not looking for trouble. Can we look to Philippe to bring to our attention anything the TAG might help with?
15:31:00 [noah]
PROPOSED RESOLUTION: The TAG decides that it will not at this time start a significant effort on Therefore: 1) will be removed from the under consideration list on the TAG product list 2) ACTION-600 will be closed. The TAG will look to PLH and others to engage the ...
15:31:09 [noah]
TAG as appropriate on issues.
15:31:28 [masinter]
masinter has joined #tagmem
15:32:09 [noah]
RESOLUTION: The TAG decides that it will not at this time start a significant effort on Therefore: 1) will be removed from the under consideration list on the TAG product list 2) ACTION-600 will be closed. The TAG will look to PLH and others to engage the TAG as appropriate on issues.
15:34:03 [noah]
close ACTION-600
15:34:03 [trackbot]
ACTION-600 Report to TAG on goals, scope and progress to date for work closed
15:35:05 [jar]
LM: Request that MIME type registrations happen sooner
15:35:21 [jar]
… You can say that there is no specification yet - register a placeholder
15:36:20 [jar]
… W3C has been too conservative, better to err on the side of aggressive registration
15:36:44 [jar]
… Enough about specs, it's time to start registering
15:37:14 [jar]
… I want the official registry to be better than what you find in wikipedia
15:38:44 [jar]
JT: Talking about media type registries - I had an action re FYN
15:39:23 [jar]
LM: If specs are allowed to fork, maybe they shouldn't contain their own media type registration, since the reg has to talk about the fork
15:39:50 [JeniT]
15:39:50 [trackbot]
ACTION-642 -- Jeni Tennison to 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 2012-01-02 -- OPEN
15:39:50 [trackbot]
15:40:12 [jar]
LM: Consider the existence of "profiles" - the pointer to the main spec would be just one piece of information
15:40:14 [plh]
15:41:15 [jar]
LM: I want to figure out whether Philippe might need help [with any aspect of the reg. process]
15:41:25 [jar]
NM: Is profile still out?
15:42:15 [jar]
PLH: Are you looking for a text/html registration that is really vague?
15:42:48 [jar]
LM: I was looking for a reg that talks about what someone receiving a document [so marked] would get
15:43:29 [Zakim]
15:43:31 [jar]
NM: Document misuses of the MIME type.
15:43:45 [jar]
LM: MIME is the wrong place to talk about conformance or correctness.
15:44:05 [jar]
LM: MIME is informational to receivers.
15:44:57 [Zakim]
15:45:13 [timbl]
15:46:17 [jar]
NM: The reg. makes promises: if doc is well formed it has such and such a meaning (dom, etc.)
15:47:16 [jar]
LM: 3023 is a spec, and you can conform or not. Sets out conformance criteria.
15:47:48 [JeniT]
plh, what I'm worried about is the follow-your-nose from an HTML document to understanding how the HTML document should be processed...
15:47:54 [jar]
TBL: The arch goes thru media type, that means you're part of a protocol, you're committing to a particular meaning
15:48:19 [jar]
… MIME type is a key piece of this, normative
15:48:22 [JeniT]
plh, which can't currently happen because there's no route from the mime type to the various extensions made to HTML
15:49:27 [JeniT]
plh, so I guess the question is: where is the registry of the set of HTML extensions (such as microdata, RDFa)
15:49:45 [plh]
doesn't exist at the moment
15:49:50 [jar]
LM: Let me try to misstate. When you register, you're saying two things, one to consumers, one to producers. Advice to consumers has to be realistic - even for non-conforming docs
15:50:22 [Ashok]
15:50:48 [jar]
NM: When something's put on the wire, there are inferences that can be drawn from the specs
15:51:04 [jar]
… It's a contract
15:51:35 [jar]
… If you send me garbage, then nothing can be inferred per the registration
15:51:59 [jar]
[but can be inferred some other ways?]
15:52:54 [jar]
LM: The spec is extensible - extensions are legit according to the spec - even though not written at the time the spec is written
15:54:07 [jar]
NM: Is error recovery language in HTML used for …?
15:55:04 [jar]
[scribe couldn't distill what NM just said into something that could be written down]
15:56:06 [jar]
NM: Fully legal, expect it but deprecated, tolerate it interoperably, ...
15:56:54 [jar]
NM: If you see a new element name, maybe it comes from a future spec
15:57:44 [jar]
LM: Jeni's action was to connect text/html to RDFa. No simple way to fix that if RDFa isn't listed in the media type reg.
15:58:21 [jar]
LM: A registry of HTML extensions would solve this problem
15:58:35 [Zakim]
15:59:01 [jar]
JT: Could W3C do this?
15:59:46 [jar]
jar: W3C already does this for XHTML (XHTML namespace document)
16:00:35 [jar]
NM: What should the TAG's involvement be in the text/html media type registration?
16:00:55 [jar]
PLH: No request sent yet
16:01:22 [jar]
NM: Maybe TAG should be more actively involved
16:02:42 [jar]
LM: There's currently a W3C policy that the media type reg is in the language spec, because unlinking led to mismatched. Probably OK in many cases, but not sure about text/html
16:04:44 [glenn]
other obligations for today, will rejoin in morning
16:05:06 [glenn]
glenn has left #tagmem
16:05:15 [noah]
NM: I think the next step on media type registration would be to get a balanced analysis of potentially controversial or architecturally tricky points regarding the media type registration. Then we can see if there's anything the TAG needs to engage.
16:05:29 [noah]
JT: We can rescope my ACTION-642 to cover that.
16:05:34 [noah]
NM: Great, fine with me. Thank you.
16:05:37 [noah]
16:05:39 [noah]
16:05:39 [trackbot]
ACTION-642 -- Jeni Tennison to 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 2012-01-02 -- OPEN
16:05:39 [trackbot]
16:07:08 [noah]
New scope: JT with help from Larry to report on potential issues requiring TAG attention relating to HTML media type registration.
16:07:08 [masinter]
it says "at least"
16:08:26 [JeniT]
"JT with help from Larry to liaise with PLH to register HTML media type
16:09:12 [Zakim]
16:09:56 [noah]
"JT with help from Larry to propose plan to liaise with PLH to register HTML media type
16:09:56 [jar]
NM: what about what TAG is doing, as opposed to TAG members. [scribe mistranscription]
16:11:30 [noah]
16:11:30 [trackbot]
ACTION-642 -- Jeni Tennison to with help from Larry to propose plan to liaise with PLH to register HTML media type -- due 2012-01-17 -- OPEN
16:11:30 [trackbot]
16:12:12 [masinter]
i liked the old action item better, because it recorded why we're doing it
16:32:24 [jar]
break ending
16:32:32 [jar]
topic: Privacy
16:33:22 [jar]
Welcome Wendy Seltzer
16:33:55 [jar]
16:34:18 [jar]
WS: EFF, Berkman, now W3C team
16:37:19 [masinter]
16:37:28 [masinter]
my contribution to the privacy discussion
16:38:07 [wseltzer]
wseltzer has joined #tagmem
16:39:22 [jar]
NM: privacy, big issue, potential threat to the web. DNT
16:39:27 [noah]
16:40:43 [jar]
ashok: Idea was to look at privacy from higher level. There is a DNT WG, that's good, but it's just a corner of the "war on personal privacy"
16:41:51 [masinter]
want to ask about ISOC and
16:41:59 [jar]
… leaks from social networks
16:42:57 [jar]
… picking up ambient information
16:43:33 [jar]
… identifying based on clicks etc.
16:43:37 [masinter]
16:44:07 [jar]
… Not a technological problem. Encryption may be helpful, but not clear how far it can go
16:44:37 [jar]
… Accountability, laws as non-technological alternative
16:45:41 [jar]
Mitigations? Technical, policy, education
16:45:54 [jar]
s/Mitigations/ashok: Mitigations/
16:47:07 [noah]
16:47:12 [noah]
ack noah
16:47:18 [noah]
q+ dan
16:47:27 [noah]
ack next
16:48:22 [jar]
DA: Data minimization as technical - granularity - this is privacy-enhancing
16:48:25 [masinter]
What is relationship of W3C role in privacy to other initatives
16:48:25 [noah]
q+ noah
16:48:50 [jar]
16:49:57 [jar]
DKA: Negative feedback from geoloc WG - they ask, who is asking for this?
16:50:15 [masinter]
q+ to ask why this is TAG work... argue against TAG taking this as a major area, not so much because of "lack of expertise" as "already covered". to respond to DanA of W3C as policy-application group
16:50:23 [noah]
ack next
16:51:09 [DKA]
Draft API Data Minimization finding:
16:53:31 [jar]
NM: Here are 2 things. 1, possibility of more traffic encryption, cf. SPDY.. performance limited devices, cost of encryption. 2. Fingerprinting, e.g. browser configuration uniqueness . These are technical topics
16:53:44 [noah]
ack next
16:53:45 [Zakim]
masinter, you wanted to ask why this is TAG work... argue against TAG taking this as a major area, not so much because of "lack of expertise" as "already covered". to respond to
16:53:47 [jar]
16:53:48 [Zakim]
... DanA of W3C as policy-application group
16:54:23 [jar]
LM: W3C is a focus of policy initiatives that aren't asked for by developers. Constituencies come to us
16:55:07 [jar]
… Many past difficulties around privacy have to do with venue shopping, esp between W3C and IETF.
16:55:35 [jar]
… Encryption is a red herring. Does nothing for privacy
16:56:05 [timbl]
Sweeping generalizations are allways wrong -- and Larry's is no exception.
16:56:49 [jar]
… Why is this TAG work? Seems like W3C work, but not TAG work - not technical. Not interested in stopgaps
16:57:53 [masinter]
it isn't that it is "not technical", it's that any TAG work would be without sufficient context to be useful
16:58:00 [jar]
NM: Look at work plan…nothing much here re privacy, barely started
16:58:20 [masinter]
"Not interested in stopgap" => "DNT is stopgap, we shouldn't do too many more of those"
16:59:06 [masinter]
encryption doesn't help much with almost all of the privacy threats i can think of
16:59:13 [DKA]
For the record: I feel the data minimization is relevant to the TAG since it is articulating an architectural principle - a design best practice - that also happens to enhance privacy.
17:00:10 [masinter]
@dka: it might be an architectural principle, but it's not clear it really helps in most of the threat cases, and it's not actionable
17:00:12 [noah]
RESOLUTION: TAG will not do a major effort on privacy at this point. We will remove Privacy from the list of active projects.
17:00:55 [jar]
WS: The framing is a good start. Threat categories: p2p, corporate, individual to government - different concerns re different info collectos
17:01:03 [jar]
LM: Threats?
17:01:27 [jar]
WS: Info used out of context
17:02:30 [jar]
LM: Is there a sense that these are more than a list of anecdotes?
17:03:15 [jar]
LM: What W3C could do: try to ground anecdotal tales about hypothetical instances, in real cases
17:04:10 [jar]
LM: If we had a better model of the real threats, we could do better at responding, with technical architecture
17:04:42 [jar]
WS: We can do better at describing
17:05:44 [jar]
LM: We need the particular cases - not a categorization - we already have good descriptions of categories, but they seem to be based on hypotheticals
17:05:59 [jar]
LM: grounding in fact
17:06:08 [jar]
TBL: risks digest
17:06:39 [masinter]
a real threat analysis
17:06:43 [wseltzer]
"concern" can be a harm too
17:06:53 [DKA]
17:07:19 [wseltzer]
...if people are deterred from using the web based on concerns that their information may be misused
17:07:26 [masinter]
concern can be caused by rumors too
17:07:43 [masinter]
many people are ocncerned about 12/11/12 or whenver the mayan calendar says the world will end
17:09:17 [masinter]
would encryption help with any of the issues in ?
17:09:57 [jar]
discussion of what to do and whom
17:10:05 [wseltzer]
encryption could prevent some of the snooping by middlemen
17:10:46 [wseltzer]
17:10:46 [Yves]
encryption could also lead to misplaced trust (in case of CA attacks, for example)
17:11:27 [noah]
ack next
17:11:40 [noah]
WS: I'm here to work on Web Identity.
17:12:05 [jar]
action jar to review what provenance WG is doing with an eye to application to privacy issues
17:12:05 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-650 - Review what provenance WG is doing with an eye to application to privacy issues [on Jonathan Rees - due 2012-01-12].
17:12:11 [noah]
WS: Part of that is getting the privacy story right, and helping users to understand the implications of what they're doing on the Web
17:14:08 [noah]
17:14:08 [trackbot]
ACTION-566 -- Daniel Appelquist to contact Alissa Cooper, organize a future joint discussion on privacy with IAB. -- due 2011-10-18 -- OPEN
17:14:08 [trackbot]
17:16:03 [masinter]
17:16:19 [masinter]
17:17:21 [jar]
adjourn for lunch
18:03:37 [plinss]
plinss has joined #tagmem
18:16:32 [Norm]
I'm hiting the road. noah, you've got my mobile if you need to reach me. See y'all this afternoon.
18:23:36 [Ashok]
scribenick: Ashok
18:24:08 [Ashok]
Topic: TAG Priorities for 2012
18:25:20 [Ashok]
Noah: We published a finding on Web Application State.
18:25:35 [Ashok]
... need to deal with Raman's document
18:26:12 [Ashok]
... I suggest we move Web App State to the completed state
18:26:47 [Ashok]
LM: Did we get community review?
18:27:14 [Ashok]
Noah: We may want to do more to promote it and ask folks if it helped them
18:27:54 [Ashok]
LM: Any reason not to make theis rec track
18:28:24 [Ashok]
Jar: Findings should make their way into architectural recommendations
18:28:53 [wseltzer]
wseltzer has left #tagmem
18:30:31 [noah]
RESOLUTION: The TAG, having published a finding on Web Application State, closes it's "product" on that topic.
18:30:55 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to announce closing of Web App State Product Due: 2012-01-17
18:30:55 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-651 - Announce closing of Web App State Product Due: 2012-01-17 [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2012-01-12].
18:32:00 [noah]
&#8212; <span class="needswork">product page needed</span>)</td>
18:32:00 [noah]
<td>Daniel Appelquist, Ashok Malhotra</td>
18:32:00 [noah]
<td class="needswork">TBD</td>
18:32:00 [noah]
18:32:08 [noah]
18:32:29 [Ashok]
The above is the list of stuff we are working on
18:32:56 [Ashok]
Noah: Frag Identifiers and Mime Types is late
18:33:18 [noah]
18:33:18 [trackbot]
ACTION-594 -- Peter Linss to with Henry produce partial revision of fragment id finding -- due 2011-10-18 -- OPEN
18:33:18 [trackbot]
18:33:19 [Ashok]
Yves: I will work on that
18:34:13 [noah]
18:34:13 [trackbot]
ACTION-594 -- Yves Lafon to with Peter and Henry produce partial revision of fragment id finding -- due 2012-02-14 -- OPEN
18:34:13 [trackbot]
18:36:38 [Ashok]
LM: Should we integrate this with the other MIME stuff?
18:36:56 [Ashok]
JT: I think it's better to keep a tight scope
18:40:44 [Ashok]
Noah: The TAG agreed to invest in this effort starting by revisiting the work plan.
18:42:08 [Ashok]
Noah updates the Product Page
18:42:54 [Ashok]
Noah: Publishing and Linking on the Web remains a top priority
18:43:17 [Ashok]
Noah: URI Discovery remains a top priority
18:43:48 [Ashok]
Noah: MIME architecture for the Web remains a top priority
18:44:01 [Ashok]
Noah: Other items:
18:44:42 [Ashok]
Noah: API Minimization --- leave
18:45:51 [Ashok]
LM: Not clear this will make progress. Let us publish now.
18:46:58 [Ashok]
Dan: Maybe a new TAG member will have new energy to put in this
18:47:22 [Ashok]
... I can come back with a proposal how to publish it
18:48:32 [Ashok]
Noah: We can leave open for a few weeks and then decide. Or decide to publish now.
18:52:25 [Ashok]
Dan: I will come back with a proposal for our next telcon
18:54:04 [Ashok]
Noah: HTML/XML Unification
18:54:19 [Ashok]
... this is either done or we keep in this mode
18:54:20 [DKA]
ACTION on me to come back with a proposal on API minimization draft by 17 january.
18:54:20 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - on
18:54:40 [Ashok]
Noah: Persistence of Identifiers
18:54:53 [DKA]
ACTION: Appelquist to come back with a proposal on API minimization draft by 17 january.
18:54:53 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - Appelquist
18:54:55 [Ashok]
... should we move this up in priority
18:55:18 [DKA]
ACTION: Dan to come back with a proposal on API minimization draft by 17 january.
18:55:18 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - Dan
18:55:18 [Ashok]
jar: Publishing a Workshop Report would be good.
18:55:39 [Ashok]
... then i can do some writing based on yesterday's session
18:55:53 [JeniT]
ACTION: DKA to come back with a proposal on API minimization draft Due: 2012-01-17
18:55:53 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - DKA
18:56:01 [JeniT]
ACTION: DanA to come back with a proposal on API minimization draft Due: 2012-01-17
18:56:01 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - DanA
18:57:37 [Yves]
18:57:37 [trackbot]
ACTION-622 -- Noah Mendelsohn to schedule discussion of as possible new TAG work focus (per Edinburgh F2F) [self-assigned] -- due 2011-12-20 -- PENDINGREVIEW
18:57:37 [trackbot]
18:57:42 [Yves]
18:57:42 [trackbot]
ACTION-652 -- Yves Lafon to danA to come back with a proposal on API minimization draft -- due 2012-01-17 -- OPEN
18:57:42 [trackbot]
18:58:20 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to schedule telcon discussion of Persistence product page (which was drafted for but not reviewed at F2F0 Due: 2012-10-17
18:58:21 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-653 - Schedule telcon discussion of Persistence product page (which was drafted for but not reviewed at F2F0 Due: 2012-10-17 [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2012-01-12].
18:58:47 [Ashok]
Noah: Microdata and RDFa
18:58:55 [Ashok]
... is this done?
18:59:06 [Ashok]
JT: I think we should declare success
19:00:34 [Ashok]
JT: I will write a final taskforce report and tell the TAG and the HTML WG
19:01:39 [noah]
ACTION: Jeni to write "product" page summarizing wrapup of RDFa/Microdata work Due: 2012-01-31
19:01:39 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-654 - Write "product" page summarizing wrapup of RDFa/Microdata work Due: 2012-01-31 [on Jeni Tennison - due 2012-01-12].
19:02:11 [Ashok]
Noah: Web Apps Storage
19:04:39 [JeniT]
ScribeNick: JeniT
19:05:07 [JeniT]
noah: client-side local storage is not a spec
19:05:20 [JeniT]
ashok: the difficulty is there's more than one web storage capability
19:06:10 [JeniT]
(looking at draft
19:07:25 [JeniT]
ashok: the success criteria look like requirements for a Web Storage Working Group
19:07:45 [JeniT]
noah: I'm trying to spell out good practice for people developing web apps, such as a calendaring application
19:08:06 [ht]
ht has joined #tagmem
19:08:27 [JeniT]
... how to design a good web app
19:08:40 [JeniT]
TimBL: perhaps express it as a set of patterns
19:08:56 [JeniT]
... when we did a top-down analysis of versioning, it didn't really work
19:09:04 [JeniT]
... local storage is new, and it will change a lot soon
19:09:26 [JeniT]
... there's a caching pattern when the URI on the web is used everywhere to refer to the document, even when it's in local storage
19:10:01 [JeniT]
noah: the TAG isn't committed to doing anything in this space at all currently
19:10:21 [JeniT]
... what we need to do here is to decide how to scope it and choose where to invest
19:10:47 [JeniT]
larry: it's difficult to come up with best practices, but we could come up with criteria for evaluating a design
19:12:16 [JeniT]
... we don't have to produce the patterns, just say how to evaluate a design
19:12:40 [JeniT]
ashok: evaluate on what basis? I thought using patterns or use cases would help
19:13:30 [JeniT]
noah: there are cases where we will have a good idea for a pattern, such as where the same information is stored locally and on web
19:13:45 [JeniT]
... but then it's hard to point to local vs web
19:15:27 [JeniT]
noah: we need a plan that's more than just noodling on use cases
19:15:42 [JeniT]
... how about we refine this draft product page?
19:16:08 [jar]
jar has joined #tagmem
19:16:13 [JeniT]
larry: examining even one tradeoff is useful
19:16:29 [JeniT]
ashok: Dan, when could we have something about the workshop? do you have a draft?
19:16:33 [noah]
19:16:33 [trackbot]
ACTION-523 -- Ashok Malhotra to (with help from Noah) build good product page for client storage finding, identifying top questions to be answered on client side storage -- due 2011-12-20 -- OPEN
19:16:33 [trackbot]
19:16:38 [JeniT]
dan: there are minutes
19:16:46 [DKA]
Minutes for off-line web apps workshop:
19:17:10 [noah]
ACTION-523 Due 2012-01-17
19:17:10 [trackbot]
ACTION-523 (with help from Noah) build good product page for client storage finding, identifying top questions to be answered on client side storage due date now 2012-01-17
19:17:27 [JeniT]
ScribeNick: Ashok
19:18:24 [Ashok]
Noah: I feel moderatly good about the topics we have.
19:18:33 [Ashok]
19:19:10 [Ashok]
Noah: Let's talk about this after tomorrow's session.
19:19:25 [Ashok]
rrsagent, make logs member visible
19:19:40 [Ashok]
rrsagent, pointer?
19:19:40 [RRSAgent]
20:22:07 [Zakim]
20:22:08 [Zakim]
TAG_f2f()7:30AM has ended
20:22:10 [Zakim]
Attendees were W3C, GlennAdams, ht, darobin, [IPcaller]
20:39:53 [Norm]
Norm has joined #tagmem
20:45:37 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
20:46:00 [Norm]
Norm has joined #tagmem
20:46:23 [Norm]
Norm begins by thanking Tim for the fine hospitality
20:47:00 [JeniT]
JeniT has joined #tagmem
20:47:16 [Norm]
Norm has joined #tagmem
20:47:32 [Norm]
Norm begins by thanking Tim again for the fine hospitality
20:47:58 [jar]
jar has joined #tagmem
20:48:10 [DKA]
DKA has joined #tagmem
20:48:44 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
20:49:23 [noah]
20:49:23 [trackbot]
ACTION-437 -- Tim Berners-Lee to create a task force on XML / HTML convergence -- due 2011-06-01 -- CLOSED
20:49:23 [trackbot]
20:49:41 [Ashok]
Topic: XML/HTML Convergence
20:49:43 [Norm]
20:50:14 [noah]
20:51:03 [Ashok]
Noah: We should review the report, determine whether further action is required and update product pages, etc.
20:51:36 [Ashok]
Norm: My goal is to publish report, which the TAG needs to do so that we can get public review
20:51:59 [Ashok]
Noah: We could publish a note
20:53:13 [Ashok]
Norm: The TAG wanted a strong statement re. Polygot but there were people that thought that that was a waste of time
20:53:44 [Ashok]
... so that does not appear
20:54:16 [Ashok]
... I attempted to incorporate the feedabck I got
20:56:06 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
20:56:09 [jar]
2.1.1 in the table of contents
20:56:34 [noah]
20:57:42 [DKA]
q+ to question the wording of the polyglot markup paragraph.
20:58:47 [Ashok]
21:03:10 [timbl]
s/Resolution Broadly speaking, there are two techniques for addressing th/Resolution Broadly speaking, there are two alternative techniques for addressing th/
21:03:25 [Ashok]
LM: Add names of other contributers?
21:04:24 [Ashok]
21:04:29 [jar]
21:06:38 [Ashok]
Dan: Are editorial comments in scope
21:06:56 [Ashok]
Norm: Yes,they are
21:07:42 [Ashok]
LM: I want references with refs to source material
21:09:07 [Ashok]
Noah: Add sentence mentioing minutes of telcons
21:09:37 [Ashok]
21:10:14 [noah]
21:10:19 [jar]
21:10:29 [noah]
21:10:38 [Ashok]
LM: Cite paper backing up assertion that "much of HTML is generated".
21:11:08 [Ashok]
Norm: Could you identify where references would help?
21:11:56 [Ashok]
Dan: Re. last para ... sets out a false dichotomy
21:12:40 [Ashok]
... should say "if you want to ... . you could use polyglot"
21:13:16 [Ashok]
... use positive wording
21:13:48 [JeniT]
"Consumers that require polyglot markup will fail with content doesn't adhere to it. Therefore, consumers that want to access lots of random data can't use polyglot. On the other hand, in a constrained environment (eg where the consumer is publisher), polyglot is more viable"
21:13:54 [jar]
People who like this sort of thing will find it's the sort of thing they like. (re polyglot)
21:14:04 [Ashok]
Norm: There was some pushback re. polyglot
21:15:44 [Ashok]
Dan: If you have a corpus you want to publish documents on web use it also s XML you should use XHTML
21:15:49 [jar]
Polyglot reduces the number of versions you have to keep track of
21:16:51 [Ashok]
Noah: Multiple uses of documents
21:19:31 [Ashok]
Norm: If there is an angle for giving polyglot a better angle, I'm all for it but the taskforce did not want that
21:20:33 [Ashok]
JT: We want to digitally sign the pages as XML
21:21:15 [jar]
LM: Just say there are use cases for polyglot the TF didn't consider and didn't make progress on.
21:21:24 [jar]
21:21:30 [Ashok]
Norm: I will attempt to incorporate this info in 2.1 and see if the taskforce will but off on it
21:21:59 [Norm]
21:22:04 [Norm]
ack DKA
21:22:04 [Zakim]
DKA, you wanted to question the wording of the polyglot markup paragraph.
21:22:22 [JeniT]
q+ to ask about HTML toolchains consuming XML
21:22:31 [JeniT]
scribenick: JeniT
21:23:00 [JeniT]
ashok: laxer XML parsers seem interesting, and there should be more of a reference
21:23:15 [JeniT]
ndw: if you want that to happen, I think the TAG should recommend taking that forward
21:23:41 [JeniT]
noah: the conclusion of the TF was that it was unlikely to be effective in practice, because it wouldn't be adopted by people using XML now
21:24:02 [JeniT]
ndw: the draft doesn't say that, it was just that the TF wasn't the right body to do that
21:24:26 [Ashok]
Norm: The taskforce did not think this was central to their concerns
21:24:28 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
21:24:29 [jar]
21:24:33 [noah]
q+ to talk about where XML forgiveness is discussed
21:25:13 [Ashok]
ack next
21:25:18 [Ashok]
ack next
21:25:19 [Zakim]
JeniT, you wanted to ask about HTML toolchains consuming XML
21:25:55 [Ashok]
Norm: We should charter a WG if we want this work to get done
21:26:38 [jar]
q+ jar
21:27:02 [Ashok]
JT: Why bother discussing the usecase in 2.2?
21:27:29 [Ashok]
Norm: For balance ... I think it comes to the right conclusions
21:27:47 [Ashok]
Tim: What was the most important point?
21:28:06 [Ashok]
Norm: How to make XML more forgiving of errors
21:28:07 [JeniT]
q+ to ask about embedding XML islands in polyglot/XHTML
21:29:07 [Ashok]
Discussion of how to make XML more forgiving of errors
21:29:55 [Ashok]
Norm: The XML states it should be well formed
21:30:06 [Ashok]
s/XML/XML spec/
21:31:07 [Ashok]
Noah: Spec does not talk about errors and perhaps how to deal with them.
21:31:40 [Ashok]
Norm: My take away was -- just put an HTML parser in front. And that works.
21:31:55 [Ashok]
21:32:20 [Norm]
21:32:24 [Norm]
ack noah
21:32:24 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to talk about where XML forgiveness is discussed
21:32:28 [masinter]
masinter has joined #tagmem
21:32:35 [masinter]
21:32:40 [masinter]
21:32:51 [masinter]
q+ to review comments
21:33:28 [Norm]
ack jar
21:33:48 [Ashok]
Noah: The conclusion section should restate earlier material. So, ...
21:34:19 [noah]
Specifically, I noted that the sentence "However, it's entirely unclear that the XML community would be motivated to adopt such changes and, in any event, making such proposals is outside the scope of this Task Force." is in the conclusions only. That thought should also be in 2.5, I think.
21:34:23 [noah]
Norm agreed.
21:34:42 [Ashok]
jar: "HTML parser" is not defined ... perhaps use "standard HTML parser"
21:35:06 [Ashok]
Yves: Perhaps "HTML5 parser"
21:36:00 [Ashok]
jar: Rewrite for the naive user ... define terms
21:37:19 [Ashok]
Norm: Define HTML parser as something that conforms to HTML5 spec
21:37:59 [Ashok]
jar: In 2.2 can you make a stronger statement if input is XHTML
21:38:21 [Ashok]
Norm: It's likely to get XHTML right
21:38:42 [Ashok]
jar: It is worth saying that
21:39:20 [Yves]
s/Perhaps "HTML5 parser"/It should be HTML5 Parser as it is the first spec to define parsing model/
21:39:51 [Ashok]
jar: Does not discuss XSLT
21:40:10 [Ashok]
Norm: XSLT is a XML tool, not an HTML tool
21:40:41 [Ashok]
JT: Use XSLT to covert XML to HTML?
21:41:25 [Ashok]
... the document says that
21:41:27 [masinter]
21:43:17 [Ashok]
jar: Says in 2.5 "the HTML parser", earlier it says "an HTML parser".
21:43:40 [Norm]
ack JeniT
21:43:40 [Zakim]
JeniT, you wanted to ask about embedding XML islands in polyglot/XHTML
21:44:48 [Ashok]
Norm: Should always say "an HTML5 parser"
21:46:27 [Ashok]
Tim: Cannot substitue XML parser for HTML parser ... they produce different DOMs
21:46:48 [Ashok]
Norm: Eventually, there will be a single DOM
21:47:36 [JeniT]
JeniT: section 2.4 should mention (a) that you can embed any old XML in XHTML without <script> and (b) that you cannot use the <script> method in Polyglot markup
21:47:46 [Ashok]
Noah: There is a missiung shim between XML and HTML DOMs
21:48:02 [Ashok]
Norm: There are several shims around
21:48:36 [Ashok]
21:49:23 [Ashok]
Discussion about differences in DOMs
21:49:27 [jar]
q+ jar do XML toolchains really accept arbitrary DOM trees produced by conformant HTML parsers? or only particular ones?
21:49:56 [Norm]
21:49:57 [jar]
q+ jar to do XML toolchains really accept arbitrary DOM trees produced by conformant HTML parsers? or only particular ones?
21:50:01 [Norm]
ack masinter
21:50:01 [Zakim]
masinter, you wanted to review comments
21:50:13 [DKA]
21:50:39 [jar]
q- jar
21:50:52 [Ashok]
LM: Editorial stuff re. comment should go to Task Force
21:51:04 [Ashok]
Norm: SOTD needs updating
21:52:23 [Ashok]
LM: There is ladder of comparisons, XML/HTML infosets etc.
21:53:04 [Ashok]
LM: Asks about digital signatures ... cannot do it in HTML
21:53:21 [Ashok]
... need to convert HTML to XML
21:53:52 [jar]
LM: what if you want to apply EXI to HTML?… want to know how to slot this (and other random use cases) into the document
21:54:03 [Ashok]
Norm: Document is clear about where it says XHTML and HTML
21:54:19 [Ashok]
... no confision there
21:54:53 [Ashok]
21:54:59 [jar]
LM: no orientation to layered architecture - surface syntax, parse tree, element semantics
21:55:18 [Ashok]
LM: Should say why someone should care about this document
21:55:32 [Ashok]
Noah: Who is the audience for this
21:55:49 [Ashok]
Norm: The Intro says that
21:56:23 [Ashok]
Norm: Technical folks on one side on the other interested in the issue
21:56:29 [jar]
LM: maybe the average AC member as audience
21:56:44 [Ashok]
Noah: Does this document do it for that audience?
21:57:40 [Ashok]
LM: Other audiences: Typical AC member, someone in the trade press
21:59:02 [Norm]
21:59:13 [DKA]
I think the document is fine for the Intended audience (modulo my earlier comments regarding polyglot).
21:59:33 [jar]
"Readers are encouraged to report additional use cases" - really? I thought you were trying to wrap this up
22:00:06 [Ashok]
22:00:10 [DKA]
22:00:21 [Norm]
ack Ashok
22:02:30 [Ashok]
Noah: Question is "Is it a useful piece of work for the audience it is intended for"
22:04:21 [Ashok]
Discussion about different audiences
22:04:28 [Norm]
ack DKA
22:04:47 [Ashok]
Noah: There is a Wiki, right? Would that answer the question?
22:05:51 [Ashok]
Dan: This is useful for folks struggling with these problems
22:06:05 [DKA]
22:06:21 [Ashok]
Noah: Can we discuss next steps
22:07:09 [Ashok]
22:07:56 [Ashok]
Norm: It's going to be hard to get all the references ... this represents the judgements of a lot of smart people
22:08:41 [Ashok]
Tim: I support taking the document forward
22:11:31 [Ashok]
Ashok: Norm should react to the comment he has received and then we should vote whether to publish the document
22:11:47 [Ashok]
Noah: How shall we publish the document?
22:12:34 [Ashok]
Tim: Let's publish as a Finding and then a Note
22:13:00 [Ashok]
JT: Do you want public review?
22:13:56 [Ashok]
Norm: I would like to publish the draft as is as a Finding then fix it up and publish as a Note
22:15:35 [jar]
LM volunteers to write status section
22:15:42 [Ashok]
Noah: Does anybody object to publishing the document as a Draft Finding as soon as Norm makes the changes we rrecommeneded
22:16:58 [Ashok]
22:17:41 [Ashok]
Norm: I would like to have it published in some form
22:18:46 [Ashok]
DKA: Editorial changes should be incorporated
22:20:04 [Ashok]
Yves suggests a W3C Note
22:20:19 [Ashok]
... Notes can be updated
22:20:50 [Ashok]
Yves: It was a product of a Task force
22:21:15 [Ashok]
Tim: Gets it into the mainstream
22:21:54 [Ashok]
Feeling that Note is better
22:22:34 [Ashok]
Noah: Norm, pl. work with Yves to prepare a document to be published as a Note
22:23:01 [Ashok]
... we can then review and then we can vote and publish
22:25:49 [noah]
RESOLUTION: The TAG thanks Norm Walsh and the task force, and expects that Norm will shortly provide the TAG for review a draft on XML/HTML Unification to be published as a W3C note for comunity review and comment. TAG chair will check with TAG before giving final clearance for publication.
22:25:52 [DKA]
22:26:09 [Ashok]
LM: Change the name of the document?
22:26:39 [noah]
22:26:39 [trackbot]
ACTION-587 -- Jonathan Rees to prepare issue-57 and issue-63 documents for TAG members to discuss at Sept F2F -- due 2011-10-11 -- CLOSED
22:26:39 [trackbot]
22:26:50 [noah]
22:26:50 [trackbot]
ACTION-591 -- Noah Mendelsohn to ping Norm end of Sept. on revised HTML/XML report per discussion on 1 Sept 2011 -- due 2011-12-27 -- PENDINGREVIEW
22:26:50 [trackbot]
22:27:06 [Ashok]
Tim: The Taskforce stems from Raman's request for XML/HTML unification
22:28:32 [Ashok]
Noah: I will prepare a covering note, which I will share with you which will have some of the history
22:29:44 [Ashok]
Norm: I prefer in the cover letter
22:29:58 [Ashok]
LM: Could be in the introduction
22:30:26 [Ashok]
Tim: I prefer the history in the cover letter
22:33:16 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to check Norm Walsh draft of W3C Note with the TAG, draft cover letter to include with Note, and review that with the TAG Due: 2012-01-17
22:33:16 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-655 - Check Norm Walsh draft of W3C Note with the TAG, draft cover letter to include with Note, and review that with the TAG Due: 2012-01-17 [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2012-01-12].
22:34:35 [Ashok]
JT: Asks about taking the XML5 work forward
22:34:40 [noah]
JT: Two additional things we might do 1) possible encouragement of W3C to do something like XML5 on liberal XML processing 2) possibly do a new version of note that would better target needs of AC members, etc.
22:37:15 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to schedule discussion of possibly getting W3C to invest in technologies for liberal XML processing (e.g. XML5)
22:37:15 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-656 - Schedule discussion of possibly getting W3C to invest in technologies for liberal XML processing (e.g. XML5) [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2012-01-12].
22:38:44 [noah]
NW: XML Prague is weekend of 11th and 12th of February (Jeni is keynoting on Microdata and RDFa)
22:38:50 [Ashok]
rrsagent, pointer?
22:38:50 [RRSAgent]
22:39:43 [noah]
NW: Anne will present XML5. Robin Berjon had some ideas for the task force, and he will present those. Norm is chairing a panel on XML/HTML.
22:39:44 [Norm]
22:40:40 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to schedule telcon discussion of possible XML/HTML Unification next steps Due: 2012-01-27
22:40:41 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-657 - Schedule telcon discussion of possible XML/HTML Unification next steps Due: 2012-01-27 [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2012-01-12].
22:40:44 [JeniT]
22:40:52 [Norm]
22:41:08 [noah]
ACTION-657 Due 2012-01-17
22:41:09 [trackbot]
ACTION-657 Schedule telcon discussion of possible XML/HTML Unification next steps Due: 2012-01-27 due date now 2012-01-17
22:41:18 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
22:41:37 [Ashok]
rrsagent, pointer?
22:41:37 [RRSAgent]