14:03:32 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ldp
14:03:32 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/06/09-ldp-irc
14:03:34 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:03:34 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ldp
14:03:36 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP
14:03:36 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see SW_LDP()10:00AM already started
14:03:37 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
14:03:37 <trackbot> Date: 09 June 2014
14:03:39 <Zakim> +bblfish
14:03:40 <TallTed> Zakim, who's here?
14:03:40 <Zakim> On the phone I see MIT531, Roger, JohnArwe, OpenLink_Software, [IPcaller], bblfish
14:03:43 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, MiguelAraCo, roger, codyburleson, deiu, JohnArwe, bblfish, TallTed, SteveS, Arnaud, stevebattle11111, jmvanel, sandro, trackbot, Yves, ericP
14:03:43 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
14:03:47 <TallTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
14:03:47 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it
14:04:01 <deiu> Zakim, MIT531 is deiu
14:04:01 <Zakim> +deiu; got it
14:04:10 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:04:17 <codyburleson> Zakim, IPcaller is me
14:04:17 <Zakim> +codyburleson; got it
14:04:19 <deiu> Arnaud will be here soon
14:04:19 <bblfish> hi
14:04:28 <pchampin> pchampin has joined #ldp
14:05:12 <bblfish> Alexandre Bertails is in a train from the South of France to Paris so he'll probably have difficulty connecting.
14:05:49 <Zakim> +??P6
14:05:51 <Zakim> -??P6
14:06:56 <Zakim> +??P6
14:07:26 <deiu> Zakim, deiu is with Arnaud and Ashock
14:07:26 <Zakim> I don't understand 'deiu is with Arnaud and Ashock', deiu
14:07:48 <Arnaud1> Arnaud1 has joined #ldp
14:07:55 <deiu> Zakim, deiu is with Arnaud
14:07:55 <Zakim> sorry, deiu, I do not recognize a party named 'Arnaud'
14:08:04 <TallTed> Zakim, Arnaud has deiu
14:08:04 <Zakim> sorry, TallTed, I do not recognize a party named 'Arnaud'
14:08:14 <TallTed> Zakim, who's here?
14:08:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see deiu, Roger, JohnArwe, TallTed, bblfish, codyburleson, pchampin
14:08:17 <deiu> Zakim: deiu has Arnaud
14:08:17 <Zakim> On IRC I see Arnaud1, pchampin, Zakim, RRSAgent, MiguelAraCo, roger, codyburleson, deiu, JohnArwe, bblfish, TallTed, SteveS, Arnaud, stevebattle11111, jmvanel, sandro, trackbot,
14:08:17 <Zakim> ... Yves, ericP
14:08:22 <deiu> Zakim, deiu has Arnaud
14:08:22 <Zakim> +Arnaud; got it
14:08:23 <TallTed> Zakim, deiu has Arnaud
14:08:23 <Zakim> Arnaud was already listed in deiu, TallTed
14:08:27 <deiu> Zakim, deiu has Ashock
14:08:27 <Zakim> +Ashock; got it
14:08:34 <bblfish> Zakim, do you know what the question to the answer 42 is?
14:08:35 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, bblfish.
14:08:37 <deiu> scribenick deiu
14:08:48 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
14:08:48 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
14:09:02 <deiu> Zakim, deiu has sandro
14:09:02 <Zakim> +sandro; got it
14:09:48 <deiu> Topic: approval of minutes
14:10:14 <deiu> Arnaud: any objects for minutes from June 2nd?
14:10:19 <Zakim> +ericP
14:10:21 <deiu> ... minutes approved
14:10:35 <deiu> ... we'll be meeting again next week. Any problems with meeting next week?
14:10:38 <deiu> ... I guess not
14:10:49 <deiu> Topic: tracking of actions and issues
14:11:00 <deiu> Arnaud: does anyone want to report any success?
14:11:01 <ericP> progress http://www.w3.org/2014/02/2xx/draft-prudhommeaux-http-status-2NN.xml
14:11:09 <deiu> ericP: there's been some progress
14:11:19 <deiu> ... I'd like to talk about a few items if we have time
14:11:28 <deiu> Arnaud: we can close action 140
14:11:32 <deiu> ericP: Yeeeeeeey
14:11:33 <bblfish> Action 140
14:11:41 <bblfish> Action-140
14:11:41 <trackbot> Action-140 -- Eric Prud'hommeaux to Schedule concall for ldp spec transition to cr -- due 2014-05-19 -- OPEN
14:11:41 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/actions/140
14:11:49 <deiu> Arnaud: anything else we can close on the actions list?
14:12:03 <bblfish> q+
14:12:06 <deiu> TallTed: there's been progress on the ACL document
14:12:18 <deiu> roger: I made a little bit of progress with Action-53
14:12:39 <bblfish> TallTed is the ACL document in github?
14:12:51 <deiu> Arnaud: there is not such status as "almost" closed, so you guys still need to properly close it
14:12:59 <deiu> ... let's start with LDP spec
14:13:11 <bblfish> s/github/hg/
14:13:14 <deiu> ... the call went well last week and we got approval to move to CR
14:13:25 <deiu> ... we got some comments from Philippe
14:13:48 <deiu> ... it's mostly about highlighting the features at risk; nothing really substantial
14:14:02 <deiu> ... we're still working on actually publishing the spec
14:14:13 <deiu> ... we also talked about having an extension for the current charter
14:14:33 <deiu> this is not a rechartering, just an extension; it doesn't require full AC review
14:14:55 <deiu> ... we were asked "why 6 months, is that enough?"
14:15:06 <deiu> ... I'm confident we can get at least the main spec out, and maybe paging
14:15:16 <deiu> ... I'm not sure about LD Patch
14:15:51 <deiu> ... 6 months is ok, getting a year is tough
14:16:11 <deiu> Ashock: if we can add ACL to the deliverables, will that require review by AC?
14:16:30 <deiu> Arnaud: short answer: yes, it will require a new charter since it's out of scope today
14:16:42 <deiu> ... we can think about that after these 6 months
14:16:58 <deiu> ... I intend to draft the request once I'm done with the AC meeting
14:17:21 <deiu> ... John has already taken the action to update the draft...so I guess we just need to publish it
14:17:51 <deiu> sandro: we still have my action, re. redirect (POWDER)
14:18:19 <deiu> Arnaud: the Prefer header now has an RFC number we can use
14:18:35 <deiu> JohnArwe: bis also has a number now
14:18:48 <bblfish> yes, but if we have links its cool?
14:18:51 <deiu> ericP: hold on, I'll look it up
14:18:55 <deiu> q?
14:19:18 <Arnaud1> ack bblfish
14:19:23 <deiu> Arnaud: the open question is whether it's ok for us to take control of DescribedBy
14:19:34 <deiu> bblfish: is ACL in mercurial?
14:19:50 <deiu> Ashock: not yet, I'm waiting for reviews before putting it in mercurial
14:19:57 <JohnArwe> wrt Sandro's item, I don't see any action or issue for that?
14:19:58 <ericP> GETting an HTTPbis draft indicates that http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231 is now the head
14:20:10 <ericP> (JohnArwe)
14:20:22 <deiu> Arnaud: TallTed started reviewing it but there has not been any input yet
14:20:53 <deiu> Arnaud: you can use the text from the email for review
14:20:54 <JohnArwe> ...I do recall the discussion, but w/o an action/etc we're relying on memory (horribly dangerous in my case) to keep these things in view
14:21:11 <deiu> Ashock: I can hold off until you have your comments in
14:21:23 <deiu> sandro: so you just want to edit the wiki, Ted
14:21:34 <deiu> Ashock: ok
14:21:53 <deiu> Arnaud: Ashock will have to catch up with edits
14:22:00 <deiu> ... will you be done by next week, Ted?
14:22:03 <deiu> TallTed: yes
14:22:26 <deiu> Arnaud: we're not talking about a final draft, we just want to have a first draft public for now
14:22:49 <deiu> ... last week we decided to publish the BP&R, are we still waiting to fix the draft?
14:23:33 <JohnArwe> q+
14:24:09 <codyburleson> Recommended text for BP: URL canonicalization (URL normalization) is the process by which http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Resource_Locator are modified and standardized in a consistent manner; see section 6, Normalization and comparison in [RFC3986].
14:24:41 <Arnaud> ack JohnArwe
14:24:51 <deiu> codyburleson: I'm waiting on some feedback; roger sent an email this morning with comments
14:25:19 <ericP> q+ to ask what are the labels for ../ normalization and unicode normalization
14:25:32 <deiu> JohnArwe: normalization defined in 3986 covers URL encoding
14:26:02 <ericP> agenda+ 2NN remaining issues: 4:using 2NN for packaging, 5:Link relative to requested URL?, 6:Link,rel=describedby to Content-Location, 7:HTTPbis caching or none? 8:indicate 2NN-ready by Accept-Related: describedby, provenance 9:other methods
14:26:06 <deiu> ... the broader context is that you can have links to a resource that is known by different names because of reverse proxies
14:26:26 <deiu> ... if you have links to both, you want to be able to say they are the same
14:26:45 <Arnaud> ack ericp
14:26:45 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to ask what are the labels for ../ normalization and unicode normalization
14:26:49 <deiu> Arnaud: so you're saying we refer to something that was not defined
14:27:13 <deiu> ericP: just noting that there are two other normalizations, for .. and for unicode
14:27:28 <JohnArwe> 3986 section 5 (which is NOT normalization) covers ericp's first case
14:27:41 <JohnArwe> ...not normalization as used in 3986 section 6
14:28:03 <deiu> codyburleson: we're using a term which doesn't seem to have been defined
14:28:24 <deiu> Ashock: I can email you some references
14:29:05 <deiu> Arnaud: we need to either define or find a pointer to a definition for canonical normalization of URLs
14:29:32 <deiu> JohnArwe: regardless of the request URI, the server is expected to provide back to all clients a header (Location) with a canonical URL
14:29:42 <deiu> ... that URL is assumed to have been fully transformed by the server
14:29:52 <deiu> codyburleson: this is Link rel=canonical
14:30:15 <TallTed> s/codyburleson/TallTed/
14:31:05 <deiu> TallTed: this header is distinct from Location header
14:31:24 <Zakim> + +1.919.306.aaaa
14:31:25 <deiu> ... if I have example.com/123 it won't do me any good to request an internal URL
14:31:47 <SteveS> Zakim, aaaa is SteveS
14:31:47 <Zakim> +SteveS; got it
14:31:53 <deiu> ... the way it is written, people are going to collapse it into a canonical URL that will not be accessible
14:32:01 <MiguelAraCo> MiguelAraCo has joined #ldp
14:32:02 <deiu> Arnaud: Ashock will try to find a reference for us
14:32:30 <deiu> ... that covers the BP&G document...anything else?
14:32:34 <deiu> Topic: primer
14:32:47 <roger> Primer: We made a little more progress. We need to merge bblfish changes, and finalise (hopefully) with a few more things by next Monday.
14:32:55 <deiu> roger: Nandana is not on the call; we're making little progress
14:33:07 <deiu> ... we got some suggestions from Henry and we want to merge them back in
14:33:23 <bblfish> roger are you on OSX?
14:33:25 <deiu> ... we hope to finalize next week
14:33:51 <deiu> bblfish: there are some paragraphs I should look though (last ones)
14:33:51 <deiu> ... I went through 90%
14:33:59 <deiu> Arnaud: ok, but we need to get it done
14:34:20 <deiu> ... if you don't have time, I understand
14:35:00 <roger> henry, yes I am on OSX. you are going to recommend a tool ... ?
14:35:18 <deiu> bblfish: coming up with better ontologies is one of the issues
14:35:49 <deiu> Arnaud: remember these are group notes and the bar is pretty low for publishing
14:36:02 <deiu> ... roger, did Nandana accept the task of publishing the note?
14:36:12 <deiu> roger: not yet, I'm going to tell him
14:37:02 <roger> actually, I just wanted help to do the merge ... it sounds like I am overloaded Nandana here :)
14:37:09 <deiu> Arnaud: I understand the merge might be painful
14:37:25 <deiu> ... Henry, you should have coordinated with them to make the changes on the main branch
14:37:43 <deiu> bblfish: I added comments to my changes
14:37:49 <bblfish> https://www.atlassian.com/software/sourcetree/overview
14:38:39 <deiu> Arnaud: I trust you guys will figure it out
14:38:52 <deiu> ... let's try to finish it by next week so we can publish it
14:38:52 <bblfish> Atlassian is very nice tool to work either with git or mercurial
14:39:16 <deiu> Arnaud: let's move on
14:39:22 <deiu> Topic: 209 code
14:39:30 <ericP> agenda?
14:39:32 <deiu> ericP: yeah, it should be listed on the agenda
14:39:54 <bblfish> Oh sourcetree is also available for Windows
14:40:13 <ericP> https://github.com/w3ctag/spec-reviews/blob/master/2014/04/http-209.md\
14:40:15 <ericP> https://github.com/w3ctag/spec-reviews/blob/master/2014/04/http-209.md
14:40:31 <deiu> ericP: this is a document Jenny put together
14:40:51 <deiu> ... there were a bunch of things that I accepted, such as Content-Location, etc
14:41:07 <deiu> ... we have another use case where we use 2NN for packaging
14:41:21 <deiu> ... they send a package with a bunch of javascript
14:41:38 <deiu> ... it's controversial whether to include that example in the Internet draft
14:41:54 <deiu> ... another comment: Link headers are relative to the effective URIs
14:42:07 <deiu> ... TAG said that Link headers are relative to the URI that you requested
14:42:31 <deiu> ... another comment was to have Link rel=describedby for Location headers
14:43:00 <deiu> ... then they advised us to follow the HTTPbis caching
14:43:50 <deiu> ... the last one was to indicate 2NN-ready, and they suggested to use an Accept-Related header
14:44:06 <deiu> ... sandro was proposing we should use a different header than Accept-Related
14:44:26 <deiu> ... are any other messages besides HEAD and GET permitted to return a 209?
14:44:57 <deiu> Ashock: it would be helpful if there was a different use case; packaging is one idea that hasn't really progressed
14:45:05 <deiu> Arnaud: I don't think this concerns us
14:46:26 <deiu> ... what I'm concerned about is if we can use the 200 response (if it's for paging)
14:47:09 <deiu> ericP: github returns a 200 with content location when doing paging
14:47:38 <deiu> Arnaud: Baker said to return 200 with a link to the first page
14:48:13 <deiu> ... we were returning the content of the page
14:48:40 <deiu> ... are we going to resolve the dependency to this in a timely manner?
14:48:57 <deiu> ericP: we should keep trying; discuss it a bit and then send a new draft in
14:49:06 <deiu> Arnaud: that draft hasn't changed since April
14:49:17 <deiu> ... does it represent the consensus from the TAG?
14:49:40 <deiu> ericP: if they do change anything it will be rather small
14:49:52 <deiu> Arnaud: I don't think we should wait
14:50:17 <deiu> ... we can just inform them to take a look at the updated draft
14:50:49 <deiu> ericP: I think sandro was suggesting a Prefer header
14:50:57 <deiu> sandro: I think if we can do a new header, it's probably better
14:51:17 <deiu> ... if we're getting this through a standards process, we might as well just go with a new header
14:51:31 <deiu> ericP: the TAG believes that Accept-Relates has not been used
14:51:58 <deiu> ... servers should not respond with a 2NN unless the clients understands it; the client can indicate this by sending a Prefer header
14:52:22 <deiu> ... John: do know why they said the link is relative to the requested URI?
14:53:02 <deiu> JohnArwe: when there is a Link header that describes the resource being return, does that link refer to the Location URI or the request URI?
14:53:29 <deiu> ericP: is there any reason we want a Link header to apply to the request URI instead of the Location URI?
14:53:48 <Arnaud> Zakim, who's on the phone?
14:53:48 <Zakim> On the phone I see deiu, Roger, JohnArwe, TallTed, bblfish, codyburleson, pchampin, ericP, SteveS
14:53:50 <deiu> ... which thing are we talking about? The thing that was requested or the thing that you're getting?
14:53:51 <Zakim> deiu has sandro
14:54:10 <deiu> Zakim, deiu has Sandro, Ashock, Arnaud
14:54:10 <Zakim> sandro was already listed in deiu, deiu
14:54:11 <Zakim> +Ashock, Arnaud; got it
14:54:37 <deiu> JohnArwe: we said we're going to invent a new header instead of using ETag
14:55:17 <bblfish> Btw, I don't have access to http://www.w3.org/2014/02/2xx/draft-prudhommeaux-http-status-209
14:55:29 <deiu> ... there is a subset of headers that describe the representations
14:55:50 <deiu> ... we have to be precise
14:56:09 <deiu> ericP: currently, it says that all response headers apply to the content location
14:57:00 <bblfish> yes, there are two types of headers in HTTP: response headers that describe the representation and those that describe the resource ( eg for the latter Link: )
14:57:06 <deiu> ... we don't want them to talk about the request URI
14:57:18 <bblfish> ) and the former Content-Length
14:57:53 <deiu> Arnaud: we should wrap it up
14:58:10 <deiu> ... there's been some activity on paging, LD Patch
14:58:16 <deiu> ... let's talk about the test suite
14:58:32 <deiu> ... we are supposed to establish a base
14:59:03 <deiu> ... then further changes will have to go through more scrutiny as we move forward
14:59:25 <deiu> ... it's not practical to approve each test individually
14:59:32 <deiu> ... so let's consider a base line
14:59:51 <deiu> SteveS: yes, I've summarized the links and the numbers in my email
15:00:10 <deiu> Arnaud: does anyone object to considering that the base line?
15:00:29 <deiu> ... when we publish the CR draft, we'll point to this
15:00:43 <Zakim> -JohnArwe
15:00:44 <Zakim> -Roger
15:00:47 <Zakim> -codyburleson
15:00:49 <Zakim> -pchampin
15:00:51 <Zakim> -SteveS
15:00:51 <deiu> ... thank you all for joining, we'll meet again next week.
15:00:51 <Zakim> -TallTed
15:00:52 <Zakim> -ericP
15:00:54 <Zakim> -deiu
15:01:05 <Arnaud> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2014.06.09
15:01:12 <bblfish> thanks
15:01:16 <Zakim> -bblfish
15:01:17 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
15:01:17 <Zakim> Attendees were Roger, JohnArwe, bblfish, TallTed, codyburleson, pchampin, Arnaud, Ashock, sandro, ericP, +1.919.306.aaaa, SteveS
15:12:36 <codyburleson> codyburleson has left #ldp
15:14:16 <Arnaud> Arnaud has joined #ldp
15:36:53 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
16:04:47 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
16:17:19 <SteveS> SteveS has joined #ldp
17:01:23 <deiu> deiu has joined #ldp
17:15:58 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
17:18:41 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
17:57:31 <SteveS> SteveS has joined #ldp
17:59:30 <Arnaud> Arnaud has joined #ldp
19:17:15 <SteveS> SteveS has joined #ldp
20:13:48 <jmvanel> jmvanel has joined #ldp
20:20:46 <Arnaud> Arnaud has joined #ldp
20:24:29 <Arnaud> Arnaud has joined #ldp
20:40:04 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
20:42:46 <bblfish_> bblfish_ has joined #ldp
20:53:29 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
20:56:00 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
20:56:31 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
21:17:43 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
22:13:46 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
22:15:32 <Arnaud> Arnaud has joined #ldp
22:18:46 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
22:32:37 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
22:52:51 <stevebattle11111> stevebattle11111 has joined #ldp
23:20:14 <stevebattle11111> stevebattle11111 has joined #ldp