17:53:10 RRSAgent has joined #tagmem 17:53:10 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/02/09-tagmem-irc 17:56:57 Ashok has joined #tagmem 17:59:36 JeniT has joined #tagmem 18:00:01 ht has joined #tagmem 18:00:29 DKA has joined #tagmem 18:01:30 trackbot, start telcon 18:01:32 RRSAgent, make logs public 18:01:34 Zakim, this will be TAG 18:01:34 ok, trackbot, I see TAG_Weekly()1:00PM already started 18:01:35 Meeting: Technical Architecture Group Teleconference 18:01:35 Date: 09 February 2012 18:01:38 zakim, [IPcaller] is me 18:01:38 +plinss; got it 18:01:46 Zakim, who's on the call? 18:01:47 On the phone I see ??P0, plinss, [IPcaller.a] 18:02:18 zakim, IPcaller.a is me 18:02:18 +Ashok; got it 18:02:22 +Jonathan_Rees 18:02:36 -Jonathan_Rees 18:03:01 jar has joined #tagmem 18:03:01 JeniT: http://www.w3.org/2006/tools/wiki/Zakim_Tips 18:03:02 +Masinter 18:03:08 ht has joined #tagmem 18:03:12 +DKA 18:03:39 +Jonathan_Rees 18:03:46 (BTW Noah invited me to attend today - I haven't gone senile - yet.) 18:03:53 +??P10 18:04:11 DKA, he probably wants you to provide the minutes from however many weeks ago you scribed ;) 18:04:24 I thought I did that. 18:04:42 Larry has joined #tagmem 18:04:45 noah has joined #tagmem 18:04:49 +noah 18:04:57 scribenic: Larry 18:05:03 scribe: Larry 18:05:08 zakim, who is here? 18:05:08 On the phone I see JeniT, plinss, Ashok, Masinter, DKA, Jonathan_Rees, ht, noah 18:05:10 On IRC I see noah, Larry, ht, jar, DKA, JeniT, Ashok, RRSAgent, Zakim, plinss, trackbot, Yves 18:06:09 agenda: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/02/09-agenda 18:06:17 I might not be able to make next week 18:07:05 Yves regrets today, Jonathan 2/23 18:07:29 topic: agenda review 18:07:55 Minutes from the 19th now sent - sorry about that. 18:08:42 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/23 18:09:43 topic: approval of minutes 18:09:57 Minutes of the 19th of January: Concentration of KIO3 (M) 18:09:59 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/01/19-minutes.html 18:10:05 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/01/19-minutes 18:10:08 Minutes of the 19th of January: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/01/19-minutes 18:11:02 resolution: minutes of 19 Jan approved 18:11:13 Minutes from Feb. 2: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/02/02-minutes 18:11:33 RESOLUTION: minutes of 19 Jan approved 18:11:52 RESOLUTION: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/02/02-minutes Minutes of 2/2 approved 18:12:23 topic: administrative items 18:12:25 -JeniT 18:12:34 no news on these 18:12:50 +??P0 18:12:51 topic: Action-563, note to Jeff 18:13:01 ACTION-563? 18:13:01 ACTION-563 -- Noah Mendelsohn to arrange for periodic TAG key issues reports to Jeff per June 2011 F2F Due 2011-10-15 -- due 2012-01-31 -- OPEN 18:13:01 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/563 18:13:12 zakim, ?P0 is me 18:13:12 sorry, plinss, I do not recognize a party named '?P0' 18:13:23 Proposed text: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2012Feb/0012.html 18:13:31 zakim, P0 is me 18:13:31 sorry, plinss, I do not recognize a party named 'P0' 18:13:51 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2012Feb/0012.html 18:15:16 I largely agree with Robin's comments. 18:15:36 I suggest removing the reference to Flash as it's a red herring. 18:15:43 (IMO) 18:15:59 Robin offers revised text: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2012Feb/0023.html 18:17:22 timbl has joined #tagmem 18:17:28 I would suggest an intro paragraph. 18:17:58 shorter is better than longer 18:20:14 Larry: i think Robin's is shorter, and removing an irrelevant sentence from it would make it shorter still, which is good. 18:20:46 Larry: I also think we should delete the sentence about SSL and privacy and SPDY because it's controversial and not helpful. 18:21:16 "The Web has become an application deployment platform for 'desktop' devices. It has been held back from this role by the rise of proprietary app formats and closed app stores. As a result, much content and many user experiences are being locked into proprietary formats and applications and are not part of the Web. This is clearly a threat to the open Web. What can be done to make the Web the preferred development and deployment environment for these types of 18:21:16 applications?" 18:21:36 Remove the whole sentence, or just the phrase about Flash? 18:22:02 The whole sentence, the discussion about proprietary vs. "open" is interesting but complex 18:22:16 This is primarily due to the fact that, as it was with Flash for over a decade, it is faster to ship a proprietary feature than the same one through a specification with multiple interoperable implementations. 18:23:26 Larry: we can raise the issue without taking a stand on a complex issue 18:23:35 I actually think the interesting point is that many proprietary features are introduced in conjunction with hardware changes and/or proprietary back-end (cloud) infrastructure (e.g. Siri) 18:24:23 It's an interesting discussion that i'd love to have but we haven't had 18:24:47 There's an interesting question about development of featurees in an "open" way 18:24:54 "Standards follow innovation" 18:26:57 "This is primarily due to " => "This may well be due to " 18:27:13 noah: we could put weasel words 18:28:12 -??P0 18:28:17 noah: I think what's happening in the mobile space is much deeper. People are building hardware/software/server stack and developing it, and then brining it to the standard. 18:28:37 +??P0 18:28:58 noah: part of what made Siri interesting was the proprietary noise cleanup. And that what happens in the open space is going to be a generation behind. 18:29:43 s/noise cleanup/noise cleanup that's implemented in proprietary hardware in the CPU chip/ 18:29:59 dka: in fact, what's happening in mobile is different. ON the desktop innovation was moving to the web, but in mobile the innovation in mobile (and tablets) is moving.... 18:30:12 noah: Anything we do on the web is going to be a generation behind. DKA: But on mobile all the innovation is happening in web. (?) 18:30:29 dka: device APIs and touch events working group... this is part of a good story, mitigation of the threat is happening already 18:30:37 Therefore, it's hard to standardize audio cleanup unless the underlying capability becomes widespread. 18:30:58 Larry: change of opinion, i'm ok with shipping Robin's text as is. 18:32:00 We agree without objection to remove the pharse: "as it was with Flash for over a decade," 18:32:02 "This is primarily due to the fact that, as it was with Flash for over a decade, it is faster to ship a proprietary feature than the same one through a specification with multiple interoperable implementations. 18:32:36 Discussing proposed new intro text: 18:32:37 "The Web has become an application deployment platform for 'desktop' devices. It has been held back from this role by the rise of proprietary app formats and closed app stores. As a result, much content and many user experiences are being locked into proprietary formats and applications and are not part of the Web. This is clearly a threat to the open Web. What can be done to make the Web the preferred development and deployment environment for these types 18:32:37 applications?" 18:33:17 "The Web has become an application deployment platform for 'desktop' devices. It has been held back from this role on mobile and tablet devices by the rise of proprietary app formats and closed app stores. As a result, much content and many user experiences are being locked into proprietary formats and applications and are not part of the Web. This is clearly a threat to the open Web. What can be done to make the Web the preferred development and deploymen 18:34:00 -1 18:34:13 -0.5 18:34:20 s/-1/Larry: -1 18:35:13 Noah: I hear agreement to include Robin's text in place of mine, minus the phrase on Flash 18:35:23 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2012Feb/0012.html 18:35:32 I have an additional item for the list. Sending in email to the member list due to bad audio on this call. 18:36:25 Larry: I propose removing Also, the use of SSL for all 18:36:25 SPDY interactions offers the promise of improved privacy on the Web, 18:36:25 but also raises architectural questions relating to caching, 18:36:25 certificate management, etc. 18:36:38 +1 18:36:49 Jonathan, is that +1 to removing? 18:36:55 t 18:37:11 +1 18:39:00 I thought we heard that, while SSL will not be >required<, it will usually be needed in practice to get through existing proxies. 18:39:30 whether true or false, the privacy comment is controversial, and doesn't add anything significant to the note to Jeff. just flush it 18:41:00 jar_ has joined #tagmem 18:41:50 Existing deployments of SPDY depend on SSL for tunneling through existing proxies, and therefore raise also raises architectural questions relating to caching, 18:41:50 certificate management, etc 18:42:03 Existing deployments of SPDY depend on SSL for tunneling through existing proxies, and therefore raises architectural questions relating to caching, 18:42:12 certificate management, etc 18:42:23 Existing deployments of SPDY depend on SSL for tunneling through existing proxies, which raises architectural questions relating to caching, 18:42:25 Existing deployments of SPDY depend on SSL for tunneling through existing proxies, which raises architectural questions relating to caching, 18:42:26 certificate management, etc 18:42:38 could be "e.g. related to caching" 18:43:09 i'm not sure "depend on" is accurate 18:43:32 Existing deployments of SPDY use SSL for tunneling through existing proxies, which raises architectural questions relating to caching, 18:43:33 certificate management, etc 18:43:39 +1 18:43:41 +1 18:43:42 +1 18:43:48 +1 18:43:49 Any objections? 18:43:51 None 18:43:56 We'll make that change. 18:44:03 -??P0 18:44:23 +??P0 18:45:16 Additional item from Peter: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2012Feb/0025.html 18:46:44 larry: I like the topic, but i don't think it's narrowly applied to CSS as much as it is that the battle for distributed extensibility continues 18:47:46 Proposed topic: Proliferation of proprietary properties 18:48:24 Proposed topic: "Distributed extensibility and CSS vendor prefixes at issue" 18:48:26 Mozilla and Opera are currently making plans to implement support for -webkit- prefixed CSS properties in their respective browsers. They feel they are being driven to this due to the large amount of mobile web content that only provides -webkit- prefixed properties despite the availability of equivalent prefixed properties on Gecko and Presto. 18:48:32 if browser vendors begin implementing other browser's proprietary properties, the entire standards process is in danger of getting usurped. This also puts the plan to apply vendor prefixes in another areas (such as JavaScript) at risk as the primary purpose for having vendor specific prefixes is being bypassed. 18:51:31 There is some hope that the CSS working group can make progress in limiting long-term deployment of proprietary extensions that would be better standardized, but prospects for success aren't entriely clear. 18:51:44 Larry: We're still trying to manage 'distributed extensibility', and the method CSS was using is now (also) under threat. 18:51:49 s/enreily/entirely/ 18:51:50 "We're still trying to manage distributed extensibility, but the mechanism the CSS WG was using is now under threat" 18:52:01 I really like that sentence of Larry's 18:52:48 From the top: 18:52:55 We're still trying to manage distributed extensibility, but the mechanism the CSS WG was using is now under threat" 18:53:05 Mozilla and Opera are currently making plans to implement support for -webkit- prefixed CSS properties in their respective browsers. They feel they are being driven to this due to the large amount of mobile web content that only provides -webkit- prefixed properties despite the availability of equivalent prefixed properties on Gecko and Presto. 18:53:10 if browser vendors begin implementing other browser's proprietary properties, the entire standards process is in danger of getting usurped. This also puts the plan to apply vendor prefixes in another areas (such as JavaScript) at risk as the primary purpose for having vendor specific prefixes is being bypassed. 18:53:18 There is some hope that the CSS working group can make progress in limiting long-term deployment of proprietary extensions that would be better standardized, but prospects for success aren't entriely clear. 18:53:40 The CSS working group may make progress in limiting long-term deployment of proprietary extensions that would be better standardized, but prospects for success aren't entriely clear. 18:53:57 Proposed topic: "Distributed extensibility and CSS vendor prefixes at issue" 18:54:07 at issue? 18:54:19 Proposed topic: "Distributed extensibility and CSS vendor prefixes" 18:54:36 Larry: +1 ship it 18:54:42 Should we adopt this as an additional section? 18:54:48 +1 18:54:52 Agreed without objection. 18:55:28 noah: send this note, on behalf of the TAG to Jeff? 18:55:32 Rock it. 18:55:43 . RESOLUTION: The TAG agrees that Noah should send the note to Jeff on behalf of the TAG 18:55:45 +1 18:55:49 RESOLUTION: The TAG agrees that Noah should send the note to Jeff on behalf of the TAG 18:55:50 +1 18:59:00 Agreed that Noah will ask Jeff, for this one and in general, what level of distribution he'd prefer. 18:59:01 larry: in general these should all be public since the discussion is public 18:59:36 larry: i think this is a good precedent 18:59:49 -??P0 19:00:03 +??P0 19:00:25 topic: XML Schema namespace document in the XML Schema WG 19:00:29 ACTION-23? 19:00:29 ACTION-23 -- Henry Thompson to track progress of #int bug 1974 in the XML Schema namespace document in the XML Schema WG -- due 2012-01-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW 19:00:29 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/23 19:00:50 zakim, ??P0 is plinss, we think 19:00:50 I don't understand '??P0 is plinss, we think', jar 19:01:40 HT: Since day 1, the Schema Rec has said "if you want to identify datatype X", use a URI of the form URI-for-schema-namespace#X. RDF has been doing this. 19:02:02 HT: It was observed (probably by Noah), that doing this is suspect if there aren't anchors for those URIs 19:02:09 HT: So far, 'taint there. 19:02:32 we should do it as RDFa, with rdfs:comment properties 19:02:42 HT: I thought 6 or 7 years ago I knew what to do to fix it. I had a proposed alternative namespace document, in the form of an HTML document, with an anchor for each name. 19:02:59 HT: Didn't happen for unintersting reasons. 19:03:44 HT: I recently tried to get focus from the Schema WG. The editor did some work. It was pointed out to me two weeks ago on the TAG call that adding the anchors makes things worse, not better, because it suggests that the URIs refer to elements, not datatypes. A bad thing. 19:04:29 HT: Didn't get to do all my homework, but would like to ask Jonathan. The TAG has long standing advice that says: you should publish a document at the namespace URI. 19:04:39 I think we encourged RDDL, no? 19:04:46 scribenick: noah 19:04:52 HT: Two part question: 19:05:08 HT: 1) Does the TAG believe that namespace documents should be served with a 200 or a 303 19:05:26 ht: if the URI identifies a namespace, should its namespace doc be served at that URI with a 200? 19:05:39 HT: 2) If with a 200, should we include directly or indirectly RDFa, to establish triples for the bindings. 19:05:43 q? 19:06:29 JAR: Namespaces seem very similar to RDF graphs. I wouldn't worry about the 200. Probably should use RDFa. 19:06:32 jar: I think namespaces are very similar to RDF graphs. We might not need to invent any vocabulary for it, they should just used RDFa. 19:06:54 ht: i know how to say 'is defined by'. jar: rdf:type ? 19:06:58 scribenick: Larry 19:07:10 jar: I'm looking at the model document 19:07:18 jeni: I think it is rdf:datatype 19:07:26 q+ to ask Jar a clarificaiton, once this discussion dies down 19:07:44 http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_datatype 19:07:46 larry: why is this a TAG topic 19:07:49 rdfs:Datatype 19:08:00 larry, there were 2 questions. The comparison to rdf graphs was in answer to #1. RDFa was in answer to #2. 19:08:08 noah: the TAG has had opinions for a long time on how to put namespaces on the web 19:08:10 ack next 19:08:11 noah, you wanted to ask Jar a clarificaiton, once this discussion dies down 19:08:45 noah: JAR, you started "Namespaces are a lot like RDF graphs". You then said "I wouldn't ... about 200" 19:09:00 s/i know/I expect we need two triples for each URI, one saying "is defined by" [some anchor in the schema spec, and one saying "is a datatype". I know how to say "is defined by", and how to say "is a", but how do I say "datatype"? JAR replies: rdf:type/ 19:09:02 noah: you might need rdf+xml or turtle 19:10:06 noah: in this case, we're saying return an HTML document with a 200, that the semantics were "this URI refers to a document, the fragments in it within anchors within the document, and by the way, the document may return RDF triples" 19:10:19 jar: your conclusions go way further than the specs warrant 19:11:02 ht: the proposal is not to include anchors in the HTML 19:11:10 jar: I'm saying use RDFa 19:11:16 not anchors 19:11:26 larry: can they use microdata? 19:12:00 noah: if no one else feels this is broken 19:12:28 ht: please put this back in the 'Due' pile, but the last call on Rec is soon 19:12:35 ACTION-23? 19:12:35 ACTION-23 -- Henry Thompson to track progress of #int bug 1974 in the XML Schema namespace document in the XML Schema WG -- due 2012-02-14 -- OPEN 19:12:35 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/23 19:12:37 define it using RDFa only for now, not as anchor. later we can figure out whether we agree with Manu Sporny about about= + id= 19:12:47 -ht 19:12:49 Reopening and setting date at Henry's request. Need to intercept XSD going to Rec. 19:13:19 s/need to intercept/need to be aware of/ 19:13:27 ht: that was useful, will go back and work on this for next week 19:13:37 topic: web application storage 19:13:58 Two weeks ago we said: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/01/26-minutes#item04 19:14:02 ex: if you are creating something locally and it will be exported, what is the linking story there? 19:14:02 let's continue in two weeks, when Ashok and Robin will be there 19:15:29 -??P0 19:15:29 noah: With this topic, we don't seem to start off where we left off, this one has been near conclusion for a while 19:15:54 jenit, you are right, rdf-mt has rdfs:Datatype as a subclass of rdfs:Class (which is a subtype of rdf:type ??…), so that's the one to use 19:15:55 noah: next topic, Web APplication, should awit for Robin 19:16:03 topic: pending review items 19:16:10 s/near conclusion/struggling to get started/ 19:16:11 +??P0 19:16:20 ACTION-568? 19:16:20 ACTION-568 -- Noah Mendelsohn to draft note for Jeff Jaffe listing 5 top TAG priorities as trackable items. -- due 2012-01-03 -- PENDINGREVIEW 19:16:20 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/568 19:17:03 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Aug/0030.html 19:17:38 close ACTION-568 19:17:38 ACTION-568 Draft note for Jeff Jaffe listing 5 top TAG priorities as trackable items. closed 19:17:39 +1 close it 19:17:58 no objection to closing 568 19:18:06 ACTION-599? 19:18:06 ACTION-599 -- Noah Mendelsohn to close out HTML5 review product -- due 2011-12-20 -- PENDINGREVIEW 19:18:06 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/599 19:19:50 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tag-announce/2011Dec/0001.html 19:20:07 close ACTION-599 19:20:07 ACTION-599 Close out HTML5 review product closed 19:20:28 action-651? 19:20:28 ACTION-651 -- Noah Mendelsohn to announce closing of Web App State Product Due: 2012-01-17 -- due 2012-01-12 -- PENDINGREVIEW 19:20:28 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/651 19:20:31 ACTION-651? 19:20:31 ACTION-651 -- Noah Mendelsohn to announce closing of Web App State Product Due: 2012-01-17 -- due 2012-01-12 -- PENDINGREVIEW 19:20:31 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/651 19:20:48 Closing announced in email to www-tag and public-tag-announce on 15 January 2012 19:20:52 close ACTION-651 19:20:52 ACTION-651 Announce closing of Web App State Product Due: 2012-01-17 closed 19:21:05 ACTION-663? 19:21:05 ACTION-663 -- Noah Mendelsohn to verify with Harry Halpin the TAG's plan to "keep an eye" on CA issues, and solicit his and TLR's help in keeping us informed Due: 2012-01-31 -- due 2012-01-31 -- PENDINGREVIEW 19:21:05 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/663 19:21:21 Sent this: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2012Jan/0106.html 19:21:27 q? 19:21:32 close ACTION-663 19:21:32 ACTION-663 Verify with Harry Halpin the TAG's plan to "keep an eye" on CA issues, and solicit his and TLR's help in keeping us informed Due: 2012-01-31 closed 19:22:02 jar: I plan to put out a draft on UDDP over the weekend 19:22:14 ashok: fine 19:22:52 noah: if you want something you want discussed and on the agenda, please let noah 19:23:00 s/let noah know/ 19:23:12 topic: Overdue actions 19:23:39 ACTION-632? 19:23:39 ACTION-632 -- Ashok Malhotra to frame issues around client-side storage work -- due 2012-02-07 -- OPEN 19:23:39 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/632 19:23:54 ACTION-632 Due 2012-02-14 19:23:54 ACTION-632 Frame issues around client-side storage work due date now 2012-02-14 19:24:05 ACTION-647? 19:24:05 ACTION-647 -- Ashok Malhotra to draft product page on client-side storage focusing on specific goals and success criteria Due: 2012-01-17 -- due 2012-02-07 -- OPEN 19:24:05 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/647 19:24:22 close ACTION-632 19:24:23 ACTION-632 Frame issues around client-side storage work closed 19:24:40 ACTION-647 Due 2012-02-14 19:24:40 ACTION-647 Draft product page on client-side storage focusing on specific goals and success criteria Due: 2012-01-17 due date now 2012-02-14 19:24:55 ACTION-611? 19:24:55 ACTION-611 -- Larry Masinter to draft initial cut at http://www.w3.org/standards/webarch/protocols -- due 2011-12-29 -- OPEN 19:24:55 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/611 19:28:36 -Masinter 19:30:00 NM: Propose we adjourn. We can discuss in e-mail either reinvesting in helping W3C with architecture pages and/or improving the presence of the TAG on the Web 19:30:09 +1 19:30:14 NM: We are adjourned. Thank you. 19:30:18 my phone battery died 19:30:21 thanks 19:30:26 i'll get minutes out soon 19:30:29 -Ashok 19:31:10 -DKA 19:31:11 -noah 19:31:12 -JeniT 19:31:19 -Jonathan_Rees 19:31:22 -??P0 19:31:23 TAG_Weekly()1:00PM has ended 19:31:23 Attendees were Ashok, Jonathan_Rees, JeniT, Masinter, DKA, ht, noah 19:40:24 rrsagent, make logs public 19:40:32 rrsagent, pointer 19:40:32 See http://www.w3.org/2012/02/09-tagmem-irc#T19-40-32 21:34:08 Zakim has left #tagmem 23:17:46 timbl has joined #tagmem