IRC log of tagmem on 2012-12-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

17:52:47 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
17:52:47 [RRSAgent]
logging to
17:52:54 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #tagmem
17:53:01 [plinss]
zakim, this will be tag
17:53:01 [Zakim]
ok, plinss; I see TAG_Weekly()1:00PM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
17:58:09 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()1:00PM has now started
17:58:16 [Zakim]
17:59:11 [Noah]
Noah has joined #tagmem
17:59:13 [Zakim]
17:59:52 [Zakim]
17:59:58 [Noah]
zakim, who is here?
17:59:58 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Masinter, plinss, Noah_Mendelsohn
17:59:59 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Noah, Zakim, RRSAgent, masinter, JeniT, trackbot, plinss, Yves
18:00:56 [Zakim]
18:01:10 [Zakim]
18:01:51 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
18:02:27 [Zakim]
18:02:50 [Noah]
zakim, who is here?
18:02:50 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Masinter, plinss, Noah_Mendelsohn, JeniT, Yves, Ashok_Malhotra
18:02:53 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Ashok, Noah, Zakim, RRSAgent, masinter, JeniT, trackbot, plinss, Yves
18:03:12 [plinss]
Chair: Noah Mendelsohn
18:03:12 [plinss]
Scribe: Peter Linss
18:03:14 [plinss]
Scribenick: plinss
18:03:15 [plinss]
18:03:15 [plinss]
Regrets: Tim Berners-Lee
18:04:39 [plinss]
Yves confirmed to scribe next week
18:04:40 [JeniT]
JeniT has changed the topic to:
18:05:03 [Noah]
Minutes of 6 December:
18:05:11 [plinss]
RESOLVED: minutes from Dec 6 approved
18:05:22 [plinss]
NM: administrative items
18:05:42 [plinss]
NM: f2f meeting jan 14-16
18:05:49 [plinss]
NM: regrets from Jeni
18:06:32 [JeniT]
NM: regrets from Henry
18:06:40 [plinss]
NM: Norm Walsh may join us from some of the f2f
18:06:51 [plinss]
Above regrets are for f2f
18:07:09 [Noah]
Call on the 27th is cancelled
18:07:48 [plinss]
NM: There will be a call on the 20th if we have an agenda
18:08:27 [plinss]
NM: and on Jan 3rd, possibly on Jan 10th
18:08:50 [plinss]
Topic: Polyglot
18:08:52 [Noah]
18:08:54 [Noah]
18:08:54 [trackbot]
ACTION-771 -- Jeni Tennison to draft e-mail responding to request to rescind polyglot request to HTML WG? -- due 2012-12-13 -- OPEN
18:08:54 [trackbot]
18:09:18 [Noah]
18:09:31 [Ashok]
18:09:41 [Noah]
ack next
18:09:56 [plinss]
AM: I've read the email, looks very good, I recommend we send it
18:10:07 [plinss]
LM: it's fine, send it
18:10:18 [plinss]
NM: Other opinions?
18:10:28 [plinss]
JT: I incorporated Henry's comments
18:10:38 [Noah]
close ACTION-771
18:10:38 [trackbot]
ACTION-771 Draft e-mail responding to request to rescind polyglot request to HTML WG? closed
18:11:24 [Noah]
ACTION: To send to Henri Sivonen, public-html, HTML chairs and www-tag
18:11:24 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find To. You can review and register nicknames at <>.
18:11:39 [plinss]
NM: anything else in this area?
18:12:52 [plinss]
JT: we discussed if we want to pursue saying something deeper on this. Is there more to do? Note vs Rec?
18:13:36 [Zakim]
18:13:46 [Zakim]
18:14:30 [masinter]
Raising the "Normative" definition, should go in to the "follow up on QA activity" pile
18:14:32 [plinss]
NM: we considered that but it should be considered in the context of priorities, so not now
18:14:42 [plinss]
topic: Agenda for F2F
18:15:25 [plinss]
NM: Larry suggested inviting outsiders, I'd like to list existing work items and documents
18:15:44 [plinss]
NM: Jeni you're doing fragments?
18:15:50 [Noah]
s/documents/first, then go to proposals for outsiders/
18:15:58 [plinss]
JT: there are no last call comments so far
18:16:20 [plinss]
NM: do we need f2f discussion on this? or can we jut vote to publish?
18:16:35 [plinss]
AM: I think we should ask specific people for comments
18:17:21 [plinss]
NM:Jeni what do you recommend for fragments?
18:17:48 [plinss]
JT: if we go to CR is that when we need to decide exit criteria?
18:18:22 [JeniT]
18:18:27 [plinss]
YL: we need to define the exit criteria, if it needs a test suite that can be built during CR
18:18:32 [Noah]
ack next
18:18:49 [plinss]
JT: I suggest we have some f2f discussion about exit criteria for fragments
18:19:00 [masinter]
this document may need other kinds of 'implementation'. Every "best practice" should have some example of practice
18:19:11 [plinss]
NM: Can you put some thought into framing that for discussion?
18:19:44 [Noah]
OK, so one F2F agenda item will be to settle CR exit criteria for the fragids draft
18:19:51 [plinss]
LM: I can write something.
18:21:08 [Noah]
ACTION: Larry with help from Jeni to propose CR exit criteria for fragids finding Due 2013-01-08
18:21:08 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-772 - With help from Jeni to propose CR exit criteria for fragids finding Due 2013-01-08 [on Larry Masinter - due 2012-12-20].
18:22:08 [plinss]
NM: Ashok, you were saying it didn't feel right to proceed on publishing without hearing from the community?
18:22:41 [plinss]
AM: right, there are at least five people I'd like to see review it
18:23:51 [masinter]
I've asked people for review but haven't gotten back anything recently
18:24:09 [plinss]
NM: we could invite some of the to the f2f
18:24:21 [plinss]
18:25:47 [masinter]
at some point you just go to CR and use that as the trigger
18:26:12 [masinter]
working on 'exit criteria' might drive us
18:26:18 [Noah]
ACTION: Ashok to line up reviewers for Publishing and Linking and invite to participate in F2F
18:26:18 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-773 - Line up reviewers for Publishing and Linking and invite to participate in F2F [on Ashok Malhotra - due 2012-12-20].
18:26:46 [Noah]
18:26:58 [Noah]
18:27:01 [plinss]
NM: I'd like to look at some of the other projects
18:27:33 [masinter]
form an independent task force
18:27:39 [masinter]
18:27:47 [plinss]
NM: I think the f2f would be a good time to decide where we go with issue 57, but it will be difficult without Jeni and Henry
18:28:10 [masinter]
1+ to not talking about issue 57
18:28:13 [plinss]
NM: I propose we make issue 57 not a significant item for the f2f
18:28:15 [masinter]
18:28:18 [plinss]
JT: fine be me
18:28:24 [Noah]
Proposal ISSUE-57 NOT on F2F
18:28:38 [Noah]
18:29:15 [plinss]
NM: privacy by design is aimed for a note
18:29:26 [Noah]
Privacy by design is aimed at Note, need F2F slot to consider a review Peter will do
18:29:27 [plinss]
PL: I should have time to do the edits before the f2f
18:30:27 [plinss]
AM: Larry and I asked the privacy guys to take a look at this, the seemed agreeable but nothing has happened
18:31:05 [Noah]
ACTION: Peter to frame F2F discussion of Privacy by design note, and possible followup up with privacy group. Due: 2013-01-08
18:31:05 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-774 - Frame F2F discussion of Privacy by design note, and possible followup up with privacy group. Due: 2013-01-08 [on Peter Linss - due 2012-12-20].
18:31:43 [plinss]
AM: ?? is writng a document on fingerprinting, Robin added fingerprinting to privacy by design, we should discuss whether to integrate or hand over
18:33:57 [plinss]
NM: HTML/XML unification
18:34:57 [Ashok]
s/??/Nick Doty/
18:35:20 [plinss]
LM: I don't see anything else to do
18:35:24 [Noah]
. ACTION: Noah to sort out status of HTML/XML Unification -- believed to be WE'RE DONE in time for F2F planning.
18:36:22 [plinss]
NM: persistence of identifiers
18:36:25 [Noah]
Peristence of identifiers:
18:37:22 [plinss]
NM: Web apps storage
18:37:30 [Noah]
18:37:40 [Noah]
AM: I ran a TPAC sessions on offline storage
18:37:54 [masinter]
I think "persistence of identifiers" is based on poor theory of semantics and doomed
18:38:28 [plinss]
AM: Alex Russell is going to create a blog post about architecture
18:39:15 [plinss]
NM: I'd like the TAG to write a piece about when to use URIs offline or not
18:39:42 [plinss]
(discussion about offline email)
18:40:09 [plinss]
NM: we've been carrying this for a year but nothing has happened
18:40:45 [masinter]
local + backup nearly equivalent to remote + cache
18:40:59 [plinss]
AM: I think it's OK to wait for the elections, if we get Alex he'll have some ideas on this
18:41:05 [Noah]
AM: Propose to NOT do storage at F2F, wait for new composition of TAG
18:42:28 [Noah]
NM: Can I convince you to try to get the right people involved to make a good plan for January.
18:42:30 [Noah]
AM: Maybe
18:42:36 [Noah]
NM: OK, it's a maybe for the F2F
18:42:41 [masinter]
'nearly equivalent'
18:42:44 [Noah]
NM: Please let me know
18:42:47 [masinter]
note dropbox URLs now
18:43:24 [Zakim]
18:44:16 [plinss]
NM: Larry, you wanted to talk about reforming the tag
18:45:23 [masinter]
i'm surprised by the 'reform' platform only because we haven't heard it before
18:46:06 [plinss]
NM: we're always limited by who shows up. If people had asked us to do these things we may not have been able to.
18:46:08 [masinter]
i agree with many of the problem statements, but not necessarily with the proposed solutions
18:48:05 [Noah]
LM: For the moment, I have no specifics on F2F and TAG futures until we discuss more details of the ideas
18:48:14 [masinter]
I wouldn't mind inviting any TAG nominee to join us
18:50:33 [masinter]
it would allow them to plan to attend whether or not they win
18:53:23 [masinter]
anyone who is seriously nominated by a member, and who is willing to write about what the TAG should do, could be invited
18:53:53 [masinter]
even to regular TAG meetings and calls, to open up the TAG
18:55:18 [plinss]
topic: issues raised by reform nominees
18:55:37 [plinss]
18:56:44 [Noah]
PL: Mostly said what I wanted to in my blog post. I don't think we're connecting w/rest of W3C very well. There are lots of places people could use guidance and not getting it. We spend a lot of time talking about talking about things.
18:57:37 [plinss]
NM: as chair, I try to let this be directed by the members, when these things come up, no one wants to do it
18:58:06 [plinss]
NM: I'd like you all to give some thought as to how we can do this better
18:58:43 [plinss]
LM: I think if the problem is a lack of interest in the TAG, then we need members interested in the topics
18:59:01 [masinter]
but I'm interested in the topics the reformers want to talk about
18:59:15 [masinter]
and i'm more interested in them than the topics the TAG talks about
18:59:50 [masinter]
AWWW *is* out of date
18:59:53 [plinss]
AM: one of the comments was that the AWWW doc is out of date
19:00:08 [masinter]
it's for the web-of-documents and we've moved to a web-of-applications
19:00:27 [Noah]
We spent 2 years trying to solve that problem. I think it was the right problem. We wound up doing a few pieces on things like Web app state.
19:00:28 [masinter]
and give up on taking pride in AWWW
19:00:47 [plinss]
AM: I think it's correct but I don't quite know what to do about it
19:01:09 [plinss]
NM: we identified this problem 3 years ago, we didn't say it was wrong, just incomplete
19:01:36 [masinter]
we need a work plan for updating AWWW
19:01:52 [masinter]
what needs to change, in what ways?
19:02:12 [masinter]
there's more than one "architecture", likely.
19:02:20 [Noah]
We spent a year making a work plan to update AWWW to account for Web apps and other modern Web developments. We did some pieces, but a disappointing fraction of what one would want. We had a table of contents (several actually)
19:02:23 [plinss]
AM: I think we need to make an effort to redo it or add to it
19:02:30 [Noah]
We did findings covering a few parts of a few chapters
19:03:17 [plinss]
LM: AWWW talks about a web of documents but not of applications
19:03:47 [masinter]
but then when we schedule meetings, we let legacy issues take up meeting time
19:04:00 [masinter]
it's a matter of prioritization
19:04:20 [plinss]
NM: we tried to do work here, but didn't do to well, I want to figure out how to do it differently
19:05:17 [masinter]
I like Alex Russell's blog post the best, because it's very specific
19:05:21 [masinter]
"This is what our biggest, “best” webapps do today, relying on ENORMOUS piles of JavaScript that largely serve to re-create what browsers already do in the hopes of marginally extending that capability. It’s simply nuts, but the TAG doesn’t seem to acknowledge the threat this poses to everything it holds dear: linking, declarative forms, data…it’s all about to be lost beneath the waves, and because the TAG doesn’t understand the growing
19:05:21 [masinter]
importance of JS, it seemingly doesn’t see the threat."
19:05:26 [plinss]
NM: It's also a matter of deciding how comprehensive we want to be
19:05:47 [plinss]
LM: we don't take votes on priorities
19:06:02 [plinss]
NM: no but we look for consensus
19:06:29 [plinss]
NM: if we agree that browser focused is more important than semantic web then we'd focus there
19:07:14 [masinter]
I have made my objections to continuing to talk about ISSUE 57 clear in the TAG. I'd join an independent task force to work on it, but I think it should be off TAG agenda
19:08:19 [Noah]
LM: Task forces has worked well.
19:08:21 [plinss]
NM: I want to figure out how to do things better
19:08:25 [Noah]
NM: I agree completely.
19:08:39 [plinss]
LM: I think having task forces would be profitable
19:09:14 [masinter]
19:09:19 [plinss]
NM: maybe the TAG should play more of a coordinating role and less of a legislating role
19:09:47 [Noah]
NM: Maybe a good idea underlying the task force idea is for the TAG to play more of a coordinating role, involving more of the community in our day-to-day work
19:09:54 [masinter]
more sponsored task forces to work on specific technology
19:10:18 [masinter]
"The TAG is the right group to formulate and articulate a theory of good layering in the web platform’s architecture"
19:12:21 [plinss]
NM: the pattern is often that a member has a specific goal but the rest of the group doesn't always engage with it
19:13:06 [plinss]
AM: there seems to be reluctance to agree that javascript has become ubiquitous
19:14:30 [masinter]
I think the "web" has changed, and the boundary between "web" and "apps" has just erased
19:15:28 [plinss]
LM: I think the web of documents is history, most are now apps
19:16:08 [plinss]
NM: there's a balance between documents and apps and we have to get that right
19:16:24 [masinter]
alexa "top 100 web sites" used in HTTP benchmarks
19:16:49 [masinter]
those are mainly dynamic sites with lots of scripting
19:17:15 [masinter] is dynamic, not static
19:18:05 [plinss]
NM: if you look at it's an app
19:18:14 [plinss]
19:18:35 [masinter]
19:18:42 [plinss]
AM: who are we writing the architecture document for?
19:19:01 [plinss]
AM: I think we're writing it for young guys starting to create web sites
19:19:22 [plinss]
AM: you have to speak about documents and hypertext, but you also have to speak about javascript
19:19:59 [plinss]
AM: I think the document we have is not oriented that way
19:20:41 [plinss]
NM: can we agree that we have concluded that the web of applications is important and that it would be wonderful if the TAG could find the right to way to make a contribution to help peolpe understand it
19:21:11 [plinss]
NM: how can we do differently so we find we have more impact?
19:21:19 [JeniT]
JeniT has joined #tagmem
19:21:29 [Noah]
NM: We concluded that three years ago. The question is, how can we focus differently to have more useful impact
19:21:40 [masinter]
i think the TAG needs a work plan to do the AWWW update
19:22:02 [masinter]
schedule more meeting time for it
19:22:05 [plinss]
NM: how is it going to be different from the last two we had?
19:22:50 [masinter]
I'd start with Alex's blog post
19:22:58 [plinss]
NM: between now and the f2f, can someone go over the history of this work and let's learn from that experience
19:23:49 [masinter]
Katz writes "Here’s another example a layer deeper: many parts of the DOM API have magic behavior that are extremely difficult to explain in terms of the exposed API of ECMAScript 3. For example, the innerHTML property has side-effects, and ES3 does not provide a mechanism for declaring setters. The ECMAScript 5 specification provides some additional primitives that make it possible to explain more of the existing DOM behavior in terms
19:23:49 [masinter]
of JavaScript. While designing ECMAScript 6, the committee has repeatedly discussed how certain new features could help explain more of the DOM API."
19:24:29 [masinter]
I'd invite Alex & Yehuda to review the draft AWWW update
19:24:44 [masinter]
updating AWWW doesn't appear in the TAG work plan
19:25:22 [masinter]
19:25:53 [Noah]
It did for several years, Larry. When that finally proved too much, we said "let's start by writing some findings, then use those to update AWWW. Seems to have resulted in a 10 year plan"
19:27:18 [masinter]
people take the product pages as a list of TAG priorities
19:27:41 [plinss]
NM: maybe we need to organize this differently, maybe bring in more people who work with the browsers and sketch out the pain points
19:29:22 [masinter]
looking at WebIDL
19:29:30 [masinter]
and TC39 liaison
19:29:47 [Noah]
I think Larry is summarizing ideas from
19:30:28 [plinss]
NM: we need to iterate on these things, and determine where the TAG wants to focus
19:30:54 [masinter]
i don't see as much specific in the others
19:31:12 [plinss]
NM: do we want to continue discussion about this next week?
19:31:18 [plinss]
19:31:35 [plinss]
NM: Adjourned
19:31:36 [Zakim]
19:31:38 [Zakim]
19:31:40 [Noah]
MAY cancel call next week if no topics
19:31:41 [Zakim]
19:31:43 [Zakim]
19:31:45 [Zakim]
19:31:46 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()1:00PM has ended
19:31:46 [Zakim]
Attendees were Masinter, plinss, Noah_Mendelsohn, JeniT, Yves, Ashok_Malhotra
19:32:00 [plinss]
rrsagent, make logs public
19:32:05 [plinss]
rrsagent, draft minutes
19:32:05 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate plinss
20:28:26 [JeniT]
JeniT has joined #tagmem
20:37:50 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tagmem
21:35:44 [JeniT]
JeniT has joined #tagmem
21:53:14 [Noah]
Noah has joined #tagmem