IRC log of tagmem on 2012-04-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:50:15 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
16:50:15 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:50:17 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
16:50:17 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #tagmem
16:50:19 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be TAG
16:50:19 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see TAG_Weekly()1:00PM scheduled to start in 10 minutes
16:50:20 [trackbot]
Meeting: Technical Architecture Group Teleconference
16:50:20 [trackbot]
Date: 26 April 2012
16:50:27 [darobin]
Chair: Noah
16:50:31 [darobin]
Scribe: Robin
16:50:35 [darobin]
ScribeNick: darobin
16:59:54 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
16:59:59 [jar]
jar has joined #tagmem
17:00:04 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()1:00PM has now started
17:00:12 [Zakim]
17:00:17 [darobin]
Zakim, ??P1 is me
17:00:17 [Zakim]
+darobin; got it
17:00:26 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
17:00:44 [Zakim]
17:00:59 [Zakim]
17:01:46 [Zakim]
17:02:31 [darobin]
Zakim, mute noah
17:02:31 [Zakim]
Noah_Mendelsohn should now be muted
17:02:59 [noah]
unmute noah
17:03:07 [darobin]
Zakim, unmute noah
17:03:07 [Zakim]
Noah_Mendelsohn should no longer be muted
17:03:11 [Zakim]
17:03:16 [darobin]
s/unmute noah/
17:03:46 [noah]
zakim, who is here?
17:03:46 [Zakim]
On the phone I see darobin (muted), jar, ht (muted), Noah_Mendelsohn, Ashok_Malhotra
17:03:48 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Ashok, jar, noah, Zakim, RRSAgent, darobin, JeniT, ht, plinss, trackbot, Yves
17:04:15 [Zakim]
17:04:41 [darobin]
Regrets: Peter, Larry
17:04:58 [noah]
Regrets probably on the 10th
17:05:01 [darobin]
NM: probable regrets on the 10th
17:05:06 [JeniT]
Probable future regrets 10th from me too
17:05:28 [noah]
Jeni to scribe next week confirmed
17:05:30 [darobin]
NM: Jeni, can you scribe next week?
17:05:33 [darobin]
JT: yes
17:05:36 [darobin]
Topic: Approve minutes of prior meeting(s)
17:05:46 [darobin]
f2f minutes
17:05:47 [noah]
17:06:00 [darobin]
NM: Objections?
17:06:02 [darobin]
17:06:04 [ht]
ack ht
17:06:06 [jar]
+1 approve
17:06:23 [darobin]
HT: I note that there are still a bunch of editorial red marks in my sections
17:06:39 [darobin]
... people haven't gone back and made the necessary changes — none of them are serious
17:06:44 [darobin]
... not objecting to approval
17:06:44 [jar]
e.g. [Who said this? RB, tutti to check]
17:06:48 [Zakim]
17:06:56 [jar]
e.g. [Who said this? RB, tutti to check. JAR guesses Dom]
17:07:06 [darobin]
RESOLUTION: Minutes from the f2f are approved
17:07:20 [noah]
Minutes are at
17:07:29 [darobin] -> 12/04 minutes
17:07:30 [noah]
Minutes of 12 April:
17:07:48 [darobin]
NM: freshly arrived, people can ask for time
17:07:52 [darobin]
... objections?
17:07:56 [darobin]
17:07:59 [noah]
17:08:03 [darobin]
RESOLUTION: Minutes from the 12/04 are approved
17:08:12 [darobin] -> 19/04 minutes
17:08:19 [darobin]
NM: look good to me
17:08:29 [darobin]
RESOLUTION: Minutes from the 19/04 are approved
17:08:52 [darobin]
Topic: Administrativia
17:09:13 [darobin]
NM: I believe that people need more discussion on XML-ER, so it's put to you
17:09:20 [darobin]
... and Robin has asked about election procedures
17:09:46 [darobin]
... hearing no changes to the agenda
17:09:47 [noah]
17:09:47 [trackbot]
ACTION-687 -- Noah Mendelsohn to look for opportunities to discuss putting forward something to the AB about the Process and the failed reference from REC drafts to expired RFCs as a side-effect of scope creep etc. -- due 2012-05-01 -- OPEN
17:09:47 [trackbot]
17:10:10 [noah]
Proposal e-mail:
17:10:14 [darobin]
NM: seemed convoluted, sent email, made a proposal based on responses
17:10:19 [noah]
Proposal e-mail:
17:11:14 [darobin]
NM: can send a note to the AB without further discussion
17:11:41 [noah]
17:11:41 [trackbot]
ACTION-687 -- Noah Mendelsohn to look for opportunities to discuss putting forward something to the AB about the Process and the failed reference from REC drafts to expired RFCs as a side-effect of scope creep etc. -- due 2012-05-01 -- OPEN
17:11:41 [trackbot]
17:11:44 [darobin]
JAR: believe further iteration is needed
17:12:01 [darobin]
NM: would like to handle this in email
17:12:15 [jar]
the iteration might lead to a decision to do nothing, that would be ok
17:12:42 [darobin]
NM: some time ago the TAG agreed that the work on HTML Data had been successfully completed
17:12:50 [darobin]
... I was tasked with recording that in the product page
17:13:58 [noah]
17:14:16 [noah]
On 18 January:
17:14:22 [noah]
<noah> RESOLUTION: The draft product page at is agreed as the basis on which the TAG closes out it's work on Microdata/RDFa coordination
17:14:27 [darobin]
NM: this email points out that on 20120119 we resolved the above
17:14:52 [darobin]
NM: my view was the TAG passed a resolution, I took an action, announced it, and propose to close
17:15:14 [darobin]
... but today, LM emailed about it
17:15:45 [noah]
Larry asks to take this to Rec:
17:16:14 [darobin]
JT, AM: Robin pushed back
17:16:33 [JeniT]
17:16:41 [darobin]
RB: push back was on XML, not HTML Data
17:17:21 [darobin]
YL: I think it would be difficult for the TAG to have the cycles to move everything to REC
17:17:30 [darobin]
... we know that there's a good start in both cases
17:17:37 [darobin]
... it's fine for the TAG to say it did its share
17:17:46 [darobin]
... without necessarily push to REC
17:18:07 [darobin]
... pushing these documents to REC can be done later, I think that closing the action and the product is in order
17:18:27 [darobin]
JT: in the HTML Data work there were two notes produced with the intent that they could be turned into something more solid
17:18:35 [darobin]
... especially the microdata to RDF conversion
17:18:42 [darobin]
NM: TAG needs to be involved?
17:18:55 [darobin]
JT: not necessarily directly, but W3C needs to find a good home for it
17:19:22 [darobin]
NM: action to check up on whether W3C is doing the right thing there, possibly in a few months?
17:19:27 [darobin]
close ACTION-664
17:19:27 [trackbot]
ACTION-664 Announce completion of TAG work on Microdata/RDFa as recorded in and to finalize the product page and associated links closed
17:20:00 [darobin]
ACTION: Jeni to check that W3C has found a good home for the output of the HTML Data TF, especially microdata/RDF conversion - due 2012-10-26
17:20:00 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-699 - check that W3C has found a good home for the output of the HTML Data TF, especially microdata/RDF conversion [on Jeni Tennison - due 2012-10-26].
17:20:25 [darobin]
NM: Larry can send further comments
17:21:25 [noah]
Noah: Actually, what I said was: I think that's an appropriate resolution in the particular case of Microdata/RDFa. If Larry (or anyone) wants to ask the TAG to consider whether, in general, more of our work should be REC-track, that would be a separate discussion for them to request.
17:21:51 [darobin]
Topic: XML-ER
17:21:58 [darobin]
17:21:58 [trackbot]
ACTION-656 -- Noah Mendelsohn to schedule discussion of possibly getting W3C to invest in technologies for liberal XML processing (e.g. XML5) -- due 2012-04-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW
17:21:58 [trackbot]
17:22:15 [darobin]
NM: JT framed the proposal
17:22:27 [JeniT]
17:22:49 [darobin]
NM: LM specifically asked that the TAG's work on HTML/XML should go on the Rec track
17:23:12 [darobin]
... would like not to discuss that now, we will see Norm in June, and can discuss in preparation for that
17:23:19 [noah]
17:23:25 [darobin]
... would like to focus on XML-ER CG, goals, use cases, etc.
17:23:59 [darobin]
JT: HT asked me to go through the minutes from f2f and pull out areas that we had raised as concerns
17:24:03 [darobin]
... put those in email
17:24:13 [darobin]
... I think that we should engage positively with the XML-ER CG
17:24:24 [noah]
17:24:26 [darobin]
... looking perhaps to drop them an email suggesting changes in their charter
17:24:32 [noah]
17:24:35 [darobin]
... focusing on what we would say if we spoke to them
17:24:48 [darobin]
... concern from the minutes are listed in my email, refer to that
17:24:52 [noah]
Concerns raised by TAG members during the F2F discussion included:
17:24:52 [noah]
* restricting XML-ER processing to non-safety-critical applications
17:24:52 [noah]
* ensuring that any error recovery is reported noisily
17:24:57 [noah]
* error recovery causing a race to the bottom and evolutionary drift
17:24:57 [noah]
* potential security problems with the same file being interpreted in different ways by different processors
17:24:57 [noah]
* interactions with media-type sniffing
17:25:11 [darobin]
... if I were to communicate with them, I would need help to provide more detail on some of the concerns
17:25:33 [darobin]
NM: some question in my mind as to what the level of interest the TAG has in dealing with this
17:25:38 [jar]
XML-ER if it exists should have its own media type
17:25:46 [darobin]
... fine for me to dive in, but want to make sure that people are really interested
17:25:52 [darobin]
... we don't owe it to anybody to do more
17:26:16 [noah]
RB: Would it be simpler if people would bring concerns directly to the community group?
17:26:39 [ht_home]
ht_home has joined #tagmem
17:26:40 [JeniT]
17:27:01 [darobin]
YL: some concerns in JT's email are already in the charter
17:27:06 [ht_home]
q+ ht to argue for TAG involvement to continue
17:27:25 [jar]
"Backwards compatible with XML 1.0." requires error reporting
17:27:35 [noah]
q+ to suggest that the marking of fixed up XML isn't quite all you might want re critical applications
17:27:36 [darobin]
... critical apps would simply reject ER, backwards compat is taken into account
17:27:49 [noah]
ack next
17:27:51 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to argue for TAG involvement to continue
17:27:51 [darobin]
... I agree with RB that if there are specific issues they can be taken directly to the CG
17:28:17 [darobin]
HT: I think that this is close enough to a number of essential architectural issues that I don't want to leave it to just CG discussiojn
17:28:23 [darobin]
... we should discuss this as the TAG
17:28:36 [noah]
Henry, can you give an example of something the tag >might< want to say?
17:28:36 [darobin]
... I'm sufficiently concerned about this at the architectural level that I want to keep it on our agenda
17:28:47 [darobin]
... I'm not saying that we should be tossing bombs over the parapet to them
17:28:54 [noah]
To motivate your "outlier" view that we keep it on the table
17:29:25 [darobin]
JAR: I agree with that, it seems that we've been talking about extension points and the such for years and we're close to that now
17:29:36 [darobin]
NM: some in the group seem to think we can just interact with the CG
17:29:44 [darobin]
... henry would like to keep it
17:29:59 [darobin]
... JAR thinks it's useful to discuss
17:30:04 [jar]
maybe 'closer' rather than 'close'
17:30:11 [darobin]
... HT do you have examples of TAG level concern
17:30:34 [darobin]
HT: several points in the discussion where JT|RB said "we agree, I expect it will turn out that way"
17:30:41 [darobin]
... but if it doesn't, we have a problem
17:30:48 [darobin]
... I would like to capture and ensure those
17:30:50 [noah]
ack next
17:30:51 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to suggest that the marking of fixed up XML isn't quite all you might want re critical applications
17:31:18 [darobin]
NM: YL asserted that processing critical applications is covered by the charter
17:31:28 [darobin]
... I don't think that's the only way of looking at it
17:31:49 [darobin]
... the scope is set, but if software is confused it will have a flag
17:31:54 [Zakim]
17:32:01 [JeniT]
it's w community group, not a working group
17:32:08 [JeniT]
ScribeNick: JeniT
17:32:49 [Zakim]
17:32:56 [darobin]
Zakim, ??P1 is me
17:32:56 [Zakim]
+darobin; got it
17:33:04 [JeniT]
ScribeNick: darobin
17:33:29 [noah]
17:34:32 [noah]
NM: Yves makes the case that, because the charter mandates a warning on fixed up output, we're OK on the "critical apps" front. Not necessarily. There's still reason to question whether the charter should have mandated a style of fixup that would have been suitable for a broader range of applications...
17:34:55 [noah]
NM: Of course, Anne's done a wonderful service by moving ahead to meet what he (and others) see as the goals, and we'd lose that if the goals changed a lot.
17:34:56 [darobin]
q+ to note that it's not fixup
17:34:57 [noah]
17:35:01 [noah]
ack next
17:35:31 [darobin]
YL: first I wanted to reply to HT that having people contributing to the CG directly is not incompatible with finding issues and working on those
17:35:41 [darobin]
... I think it will be faster if people comment directly to the CG
17:36:03 [darobin]
... 2nd point is that it's a CG, it's not tasked to produce a Rec, I wouldn't worry too much about small details
17:36:12 [jar]
wiki has no pointer to mailing list
17:36:32 [JeniT]
jar, the home page for the CG has the link on the left
17:36:32 [noah]
I'm not saying what the WG is doing is wrong or bad. I'm saying that the goals weren't debated as broadly as we do for some other work.
17:36:36 [darobin]
... in the charter and such — I think the fact they added that errors are surfaced at the application level is a sign that they want to tackle applications possibly rejecting content
17:36:43 [noah]
In practice, going down this path is probably the right thing for now.
17:36:47 [darobin]
... taking into account security-critical applications
17:36:58 [ht]
q+ to argue for opt-in, not opt-out
17:37:01 [darobin]
... but I thikn it's a good indication, and we can trust the process of the CG
17:37:03 [darobin]
... and monitor it
17:37:05 [jar]
17:37:09 [darobin]
ack me
17:37:11 [Zakim]
darobin, you wanted to note that it's not fixup
17:37:16 [noah]
Right Robin...but the point you're not addressing is that the fixups themselves are designed for interactive browser applications.
17:37:48 [noah]
RB: I think it will be faster to bring concerns to the CG directly. It's a CG, not a WG. Doesn't formally need a charter. That was done to be a helpful point of reference.
17:38:10 [Ashok]
17:38:15 [noah]
RB: It's not aimed at "error recovery" it's designed to take any input and produce a parse. Not sure the concerns about critical apps apply
17:38:29 [noah]
I note that the group is titled XML-ER
17:38:50 [noah]
RB: XML-ER naming is the result of my bad joke, now regretted.
17:38:52 [noah]
17:38:54 [noah]
ack next
17:38:56 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to argue for opt-in, not opt-out
17:39:19 [jar]
17:39:21 [darobin]
HT: maybe RB did just say so, but thanks for reminding us that this is not a WG which changes the dynamic
17:39:32 [darobin]
... the charter is just a convenience and isn't binding
17:39:37 [darobin]
... but it's an indication of direction
17:40:08 [darobin]
... we may be headed towards a situation in which apps can opt-out of ER
17:40:26 [darobin]
... but I'm not sure I want it that way, I think I want it opt-in
17:40:31 [noah]
17:40:40 [darobin]
... nobody is ever going to see fixed up output unless they take steps to
17:40:45 [darobin]
... it shouldn't be the default
17:41:03 [darobin]
JAR: isn't that somethign that different processors e.g. browsers might default differently
17:41:06 [darobin]
... ?
17:41:15 [jar]
wasn't me saying that
17:41:21 [noah]
ack next
17:41:22 [darobin]
HT: I don't think so, but we'll have to see how it develops
17:41:26 [jar]
17:41:31 [darobin]
17:41:44 [darobin]
AM: really any inpuyt?
17:41:46 [jar]
This is very interesting… very similar to sniffing
17:41:55 [darobin]
RB: yes
17:42:07 [darobin]
HT: he did, which is reasonable so long as it's deterministic
17:42:19 [darobin]
NM: this is similar to HTML5 where it does that
17:42:39 [Zakim]
17:42:40 [darobin]
... this can include some complex parsers for HTML
17:42:55 [darobin]
... but I don't think that this is reasonable for e.g. importing to a DB
17:43:03 [darobin]
... but you can imagine that some fixups are low-risk
17:43:16 [darobin]
... e.g. upper/lowercase
17:43:25 [darobin]
JAR: that doesn't sound good for XML
17:43:29 [darobin]
NM: right
17:43:48 [darobin]
JAR: XML assigns errors to some strings
17:43:53 [darobin]
... this is incompatible with XML
17:43:57 [Zakim]
17:44:09 [darobin]
NM: this will operate successfully with a lot of apps that expect XML
17:44:20 [darobin]
... we're talking about when this is appropriate
17:44:31 [Zakim]
17:44:31 [darobin]
... do I ever want to import broken XML to XML tooling?
17:44:35 [jar]
17:44:47 [noah]
17:44:56 [darobin]
JAR: this is exactly the same question about authoritative metadata and sniffing
17:45:07 [Zakim]
17:45:13 [darobin]
NM: there's a move in teh community that XML is not successful on the Web because it is too strict
17:45:32 [darobin]
... XML-ER builds a tree for "broken" content
17:45:32 [noah]
17:45:45 [darobin]
JAR: not arguing the merits, the TAG has been here several times
17:45:56 [darobin]
... why would we say something different?
17:46:18 [darobin]
NM: the community is asserting that XML, which is important to W3C, is having far more limited impact than we wanted
17:46:37 [darobin]
... trying to be helpful to a broader range of things that people are doing
17:46:46 [noah]
17:46:47 [darobin]
... without crashing airplanes
17:47:06 [ht]
q+ to ask what the architectural locus of the result will be
17:47:09 [darobin]
JAR: just saying that we shouldn't take this in isolation, should use the context of authoritative metadata
17:47:19 [JeniT]
ack ht
17:47:20 [noah]
ack next
17:47:20 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to ask what the architectural locus of the result will be
17:48:00 [darobin]
HT: JAR's question made me realise that I'd like to hear how this sits with the notion of media type
17:48:29 [darobin]
... as JAR pointed out, the XML spec says that a string of characters which doesn't satisfy the condition for WF
17:48:35 [darobin]
... is not XML, it's just characters
17:48:40 [darobin]
... it's not XML with errors
17:48:47 [darobin]
... delicate but relevant point
17:49:10 [darobin]
... people would be comfortable with saying "this is Fortran with a bug", but people don't say that about XML
17:49:29 [jar]
17:49:31 [jar]
17:49:35 [darobin]
NM: what usually happens is that for programming languages, the spec is strict but they can resync
17:49:54 [darobin]
HT: I deny that — they define sync points so that the compiler can give errors
17:50:27 [darobin]
... main point is where does this fit in the space that we know about in terms of media types
17:50:41 [darobin]
... content type but also accept headers
17:51:07 [darobin]
... unlike text/html which is being redefined, the jury's still out on what they say
17:51:21 [darobin]
... but they might say that any content might legitimately be served as text/html
17:51:49 [darobin]
... several people have made clear that the goal of the XML-ER is not to redefine the application/xml media type
17:51:56 [noah]
I hope they don't say that any content is validly served as text/html. I hope/expect they will make a massive application of Postel's law, and say legally served content MUST validate, but clients may be liberal in what they process.
17:52:13 [noah]
RB: I think the media type question is very much open in the CG.
17:52:25 [ht]
s/that the goal/that they hope the goal/
17:52:26 [noah]
I think Henry was talking about the likely registration of text/html
17:52:32 [noah]
Not anything to do with the CG
17:52:44 [noah]
RB: The question was how to make XML usable in various situations without breaking things.
17:53:48 [noah]
RB: Nobody has yet looked in detail at whether to recommend use of application/xml, which would be a significant change the registrarion
17:53:49 [darobin]
NM: also a question about whether text/html sets a precedent
17:53:56 [noah]
s/set/will set/
17:54:02 [jar]
17:54:05 [darobin]
HT: we're still waiting on that one, but we'll have to look at it
17:54:10 [noah]
ack mext
17:54:15 [noah]
ack next
17:54:35 [darobin]
JAR: regardless of what the CG decides to do, this is a very interesting question, I see parallels with other issues
17:54:39 [darobin]
... we should keep this going
17:54:45 [ht]
We need a Postel's Law issue
17:54:56 [darobin]
... maybe we should wait until someone has something to say about it
17:54:59 [darobin]
... but shouldn't close
17:55:05 [darobin]
+1 on a Postel issue
17:55:08 [jar]
17:55:08 [noah]
17:55:08 [trackbot]
ACTION-696 -- Jeni Tennison to frame discussion of XML-ER goals and use cases -- due 2012-04-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW
17:55:08 [trackbot]
17:55:18 [noah]
17:55:18 [trackbot]
ACTION-656 -- Noah Mendelsohn to schedule discussion of possibly getting W3C to invest in technologies for liberal XML processing (e.g. XML5) -- due 2012-04-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW
17:55:18 [trackbot]
17:55:45 [darobin]
NM: this action dates from before the CG, my work is done
17:55:50 [darobin]
... close both?
17:56:00 [darobin]
... to keep this on the table, what's the next step?
17:56:08 [darobin]
JAR: someone to think about this
17:56:15 [darobin]
... I see big parallels with httpRange-14
17:56:28 [darobin]
NM: I was hoping you wouldn't say that
17:56:45 [darobin]
HT: I agree with JAR, and agree it's going to be hard to find something to say about this
17:56:52 [jar]
17:56:52 [trackbot]
ISSUE-20 -- What should specifications say about error handling? -- open
17:56:52 [trackbot]
17:57:08 [darobin]
... we have an issue similar to hr14 which keeps coming up: is Postel's Law of any use?
17:57:15 [darobin]
... if not, should we write an obit?
17:57:24 [darobin]
... if it is, can we state so?
17:57:42 [darobin]
... if we have something different what's the delta?
17:57:50 [darobin]
NM: I'm not sure that's as fraught as hr14
17:58:00 [darobin]
Scribe notes famous last words
17:58:11 [darobin]
NM: seems close to authoritative metadata indeed
17:58:34 [darobin]
... Postel's law is out there to advocate in favour of robustness over safety
17:58:47 [darobin]
... trying to get to the ongoing effort about HTML/XML unification
17:59:10 [darobin]
... tempting for me to say that the bits that are specifically about XML should go to that TF, and anyone is welcome to do that
17:59:33 [darobin]
... HT is saying that we could invest in the deeper quesiotn of Postel's Law and its relationship with authoritative metadata
17:59:45 [darobin]
... anyone want to do the work?
17:59:55 [darobin]
HT: want to yes, but can is a different question
18:00:04 [jar]
18:00:12 [darobin]
NM: this is significant if done well, but we need commitment
18:01:12 [noah]
close ACTION-696?
18:01:19 [noah]
close ACTION-696
18:01:19 [trackbot]
ACTION-696 frame discussion of XML-ER goals and use cases closed
18:01:24 [noah]
close ACTION-656
18:01:24 [trackbot]
ACTION-656 Schedule discussion of possibly getting W3C to invest in technologies for liberal XML processing (e.g. XML5) closed
18:01:26 [darobin]
NM: if someone wants to bring this up again, I'll be sympathetic so long as they can point out what's changed
18:01:57 [noah]
NM: To sum up, the XML-specific part of this may come up again in the context of the HTML/XML unification effort, which is ongoing.
18:02:18 [noah]
NM: Otherwise, asking to reopen focus on XML-ER is in orde >if< someone steps up to move it forward and do real useful work on it.
18:02:45 [ht]
s/in orde/in order/
18:03:01 [jar]
error handling and extension points are very closely related
18:03:08 [noah]
NM: Likewise, starting a major effort on the tension between authoritative metadata and Postel's law sounds very cool ( to the chair anyway ), but only if someone is ready to do months of work on it.
18:03:10 [darobin]
and versioning!
18:03:29 [darobin]
Topic: TAG Election Procedures
18:03:41 [darobin]
NM: framing from the chair
18:03:59 [darobin]
... number of emails flying in various quarters about changing the TAG and all that
18:04:11 [darobin]
... before Sophia I asked if we wanted to talk about that, but it was rejected
18:04:16 [darobin]
HT: for discussion at the f2f
18:04:34 [darobin]
NM: it may be better to talk of this f2f though, can have lunch discussions and the such
18:04:54 [darobin]
... first of all, it's been noted several times that changes to the process are not things that we drive
18:04:59 [darobin]
... but we can ask for them
18:05:09 [darobin]
... received objections to having this discussion at all
18:05:21 [darobin]
... so for this afternoon, the scope is strictly about election procedures
18:05:32 [darobin]
... if people have other suggestions, please send them in email
18:05:43 [darobin]
... these are time-consuming so please set the bar high
18:05:54 [ht]
q+ to agree on the bad effects of tactical voting in TAG elections
18:06:05 [darobin]
... I get nervous when we get too far in proposals for change without being clear about what we are trying to change
18:06:31 [noah]
18:06:31 [JeniT]
18:07:21 [noah]
RB: I sent some feedback to the member list, felt encouraged by the response, so wanted to bring it forward for wider discussion. These are more to practice, rather than formal process.
18:07:29 [noah]
RB: E.g. to vote counting
18:07:58 [noah]
(Hmm...I thought the counting procedure was at least implicitly part of the process)
18:08:02 [noah]
RB: Ideas:
18:08:14 [noah]
RB: 1) Make nominee list public (don't think it is)
18:08:57 [JeniT]
s/These are more to practice, rather than formal process./Two of these are just to practice, vote counting is a change to process./
18:09:05 [noah]
RB: 2) Avoid tactical voting, probably as embodied in WBS (to avoid tactical voting...perceive that members avoid casting second vote when first choice is at risk)
18:09:34 [jar]
18:09:37 [jar]
18:09:38 [noah]
RB: 3) Have a public mailing list on which people can discuss the election with the candidates, get answers from the candidates.
18:09:58 [Ashok]
I think the recommendation is to use preferential voting -- i.e. first, second, etc.
18:10:03 [darobin]
HT: I strongly endorse the change to Process to avoid tactical voting
18:10:23 [darobin]
... I'm conscious that it's awkward to say so
18:10:38 [darobin]
... but I will say that in every election I have voted in I have voted only for myself
18:10:45 [darobin]
... and I think that's broken
18:11:19 [jar]
18:11:23 [noah]
ack next
18:11:24 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to agree on the bad effects of tactical voting in TAG elections
18:11:26 [noah]
ack next
18:11:33 [ht]
s/election I have voted/election I have stood/
18:11:41 [darobin]
s/but I will say that in every election I have voted in I have voted only for myself/but I will say that in every election in which I stood I have voted only for myself
18:12:01 [darobin]
JAR: I think that we need to look at the broader problem and wonder if election reform will solve that
18:12:23 [darobin]
... the problem is that we want abilities we don't have
18:12:27 [darobin]
... I don't think that this solves that
18:12:35 [darobin]
q+ to point out that this helps
18:12:48 [noah]
18:12:49 [ht]
Oh yes, and I meant to say contra LM in email that it's precisely when the number of candidates is just larger than the number of seats that tactical voting is most tempting
18:12:51 [darobin]
NM: I don't want to pull in the entire scope of changing the TAG
18:12:53 [darobin]
ack me
18:12:53 [noah]
18:12:55 [Zakim]
darobin, you wanted to point out that this helps
18:13:17 [jar]
the problem is getting constituencies represented, and getting expertise in areas where we're weak
18:13:35 [Zakim]
18:14:06 [jar]
18:14:08 [jar]
18:14:31 [JeniT]
RB: I've spoken to people who have wanted to run, but didn't bother because they didn't feel they had a chance of winning
18:14:37 [noah]
RB: Don't focus just on counting. Right now, people who aren't well known in the AC don't run, because they perceive that without name recognition in the AC they can't win
18:14:39 [noah]
ack nesxt
18:14:42 [noah]
ack next
18:15:03 [darobin]
NM: two or three separate things that may be in contradiction
18:15:18 [darobin]
... one is that I think that RB is making good points in isolation
18:15:28 [darobin]
... tactical voting bad, people telling their story good
18:15:46 [darobin]
... two, be careful. If you look at who's running, there are some issues that aren't being discussed here
18:16:18 [darobin]
... as chair I feel tension between what we need to deliver and the notion that people put themselves to run
18:16:31 [darobin]
... but ACs don't ask if people can write
18:16:45 [darobin]
... but writing skills are really important for the TAG
18:16:52 [darobin]
... three, the TAG is a funny group
18:17:06 [darobin]
... I have an opinion about it, but others see it differently
18:17:15 [darobin]
... see its goal as making people happy
18:17:41 [darobin]
... but it seems that if you're going to do more than very small fixes to the process then you're going to have to look at broader questions
18:18:01 [darobin]
... one point of view is lets at least fix the small things, put the bigger things on the table later
18:18:14 [darobin]
... but there's the risk that people will perceive that we're fixing the bigger issues
18:18:29 [darobin]
... one thing I will fight against is backing into revisiting what the TAG is about
18:18:41 [darobin]
... it's important, but it's something that needs to be done with care
18:18:57 [darobin]
... to some degree the TAG was chartered in part to be unpopular
18:19:05 [darobin]
... and look at inconvenient things
18:19:48 [darobin]
... it's really hard for me as chair to know when we're doing our job and when we're just being stupid
18:19:51 [noah]
18:19:53 [jar]
RB, do you agree with what I said (that process changes are a means to an end), do you agree with what I said the end was, and how far do you think the process changes go toward achieving that end, 10%, 50% 90%?
18:19:55 [noah]
ack next
18:20:34 [noah]
NM: You mean the particular 3 changes you proposed.
18:20:36 [noah]
JAR: Yes.
18:20:41 [noah]
RB: What means to what ends?
18:20:46 [noah]
JAR: The one I said.
18:20:59 [noah]
JAR: Bringing better constituency representation and more expertise.
18:21:05 [noah]
RB: That's what I meant by better candidates
18:21:34 [noah]
RB: Chances of success are hard to judge. One "better" person out of 5 might be good.
18:22:03 [darobin]
NM: there are TAG members who in retrospect turn out to be stronger and that's great
18:22:23 [darobin]
... but at times we need several, it may be better to have several people on one topic at times
18:22:36 [darobin]
... no corporation would appoint us in the way we are
18:22:44 [darobin]
... I think Tim's appointees are often the strongest
18:22:45 [jar]
RB ventured 40%, I think… I'm satisfied with that kind of answer, but note that in future we need to talk about the other 60%
18:23:00 [darobin]
... and I think that he uses his vision for that
18:23:12 [darobin]
... I'm not convinced that the AC takes that into account
18:23:56 [darobin]
... the time investment is pretty significant
18:24:06 [darobin]
... it's good that independents are willing to stretch
18:24:17 [darobin]
... but it's hard without deep corporate pockets
18:24:53 [darobin]
NM: if you're willing the grant that there were problems implicitly solved in RB's proposal
18:25:05 [darobin]
... I think there's agreement that these are small steps in the right direction
18:25:13 [darobin]
... but should the TAG do something with this?
18:25:21 [darobin]
... individuals can go to the AB directly
18:25:43 [jar]
18:25:45 [darobin]
... TAG aware of issues, point out sympathy on the TAG for solving this
18:25:50 [darobin]
... point the AB to these minutes
18:25:52 [Yves]
if the TAG says "yes it should be fixed in a way" it would be a good indication that individual claims are valid
18:26:02 [darobin]
JAR: I see LM's point that the TAG doesn't do process
18:26:07 [darobin]
... but that's not the end of the story
18:26:22 [darobin]
... in order for the TAG to address its charter the TAG needs specific people
18:26:31 [darobin]
... RB's proposal is about helping with that
18:26:56 [darobin]
NM: it would take weeks and months for the TAG to discuss the broader issues
18:27:06 [darobin]
... but it would take months and we haven't done it yet
18:27:25 [darobin]
... trying to suggest that people here approach Team and AB pointing to these minutes
18:27:46 [darobin]
... it does not the question about are we staffing the TAG right
18:27:50 [jar]
if it did 40% that would be huge
18:28:00 [darobin]
... if it's the only change we make in ten years, I don't want it to happen
18:28:18 [noah]
18:28:27 [darobin]
... but if it's a small tweak we can do without any presumption that no further changes and debate will happen, then it could be taken to the AB/Team
18:28:59 [darobin]
RB: happy to go to the AB and point to these minutes
18:29:20 [darobin]
NM: if you want, draft a note, send it to the member list, and give us a chance to review
18:29:32 [darobin]
... and let me as chair draft another note giving context and larger issues
18:29:45 [darobin]
... capture informal feeling that there are concerns
18:31:42 [darobin]
ACTION: Robin to send note to tag@ that he will send later to the AB (as himself) proposing the changes to electoral proceedings
18:31:43 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-700 - Send note to tag@ that he will send later to the AB (as himself) proposing the changes to electoral proceedings [on Robin Berjon - due 2012-05-03].
18:31:51 [darobin]
ACTION: Noah to follow up with Robin on election reform
18:31:51 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-701 - Follow up with Robin on election reform [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2012-05-03].
18:31:56 [noah]
ACTION: Noah to follow up with Robin on election reform proposals
18:31:56 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-702 - Follow up with Robin on election reform proposals [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2012-05-03].
18:32:15 [darobin]
action-702 closed
18:32:15 [trackbot]
ACTION-702 Follow up with Robin on election reform proposals closed
18:32:40 [darobin]
NM: remind me of what you'd like discussed
18:32:42 [darobin]
18:32:42 [Zakim]
18:32:46 [Zakim]
18:32:49 [darobin]
trackbot, end meeting
18:32:49 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
18:32:49 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been darobin, jar, ht, Noah_Mendelsohn, Ashok_Malhotra, JeniT, Yves
18:32:51 [Zakim]
18:32:51 [Zakim]
18:32:53 [Zakim]
18:32:57 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:32:57 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
18:32:58 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
18:32:58 [RRSAgent]
I see 4 open action items saved in :
18:32:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jeni to check that W3C has found a good home for the output of the HTML Data TF, especially microdata/RDF conversion - due 2012-10-26 [1]
18:32:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
18:32:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Robin to send note to tag@ that he will send later to the AB (as himself) proposing the changes to electoral proceedings [2]
18:32:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
18:32:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Noah to follow up with Robin on election reform [3]
18:32:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
18:32:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Noah to follow up with Robin on election reform proposals [4]
18:32:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
18:33:00 [Zakim]
18:33:02 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()1:00PM has ended
18:33:02 [Zakim]
Attendees were darobin, jar, ht, Noah_Mendelsohn, Ashok_Malhotra, JeniT, Yves