See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 01 June 2015
<Arnaud> as far as I know, we don't have a webex reservation yet
<Arnaud> so we're sticking to zakim at least for today
<scribe> scribenick: deiu
<Arnaud> Proposal: Approve the minutes of the 5 May teleconf: http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2015-05-11
Arnaud: any objections?
<Arnaud> RESOLVED: Approve the minutes of the 5 May teleconf: http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2015-05-11
Arnaud: we can meet again in 2 weeks, June 16th
Arnaud: we have two open
actions
... we can close Action-161, Andrei has done that
... and then Action-162 will remain pending until Rob sends us
an update
... is there any progress we should be aware re. paging?
... if not, then we'll proceed with publishing Paging as a WG
note
ericP: do we have to do some "status of the document" to make it consistent?
Arnaud: we have lost the main
editors of that spec, so someone needs to step up and work on
it
... Ashok is the last editor
... basically wrapping up the document and adding a note that
says the doc is no longer on the REC track and it will be
published as a note
Ashok: OK, I'll do that
ericP: the abstract and the intro need to be consistent with the note format
Arnaud: pchampin said the test suite is complete, are we getting any implementation reports?
pchampin: I didn't get any response to my mail
Arnaud: are we going to fail to meet the exit criteria for that too?
pchampin: betehess has an implementation he needs to report on
Arnaud: officially the WG expires at the end of July, and since W3C now has stricter rules, we won't be able to publish anything if the WG expires
[people counting implementations]
deiu: we have one report from pchampin and one pending report from betehess
Arnaud: the report page is empty by the way
<pchampin> http://pchampin.github.io/ld-patch-testsuite/impl-report.html
Arnaud: so this leads us to LDP Next
Arnaud: we'll be able to still
communicate in the transition period
... we may have to use WebEx starting with the next call
... we'll only use it for voice, with text going on in the IRC
channel
... the existing charter goes on to end of July
... to recharter there's a 4 week period (for AC review) and we
need to make sure that W3M is up for it in the first
place
... if we don't want to have any disruption, then the deadline
is the same (2 weeks from now)
... otherwise the WG will officially expire and we won't be
able to publish anything
... and rechartering it will take longer
... by the way, the rechartering requires that all the members
are asked for their opinion
... the used to be no specific criteria for going through, but
now need a % of members to support the proposal
ericP: I think it's 20% of members
Arnaud: we will have to do a little bit of lobbying outside the group
<Ashok> He said 20 members ... I think it's 15 percent
Arnaud: I can tell you that at
IBM, I get calls from people to support certain groups
... deiu took the action to edit the new charter and post on
the mailing list (which he did, albeit a bit late) and then we
didn't get any comments
... so what's the problem?
... are people still interested or not?
Ashok: I think it looked good, modulo a minor editorial issue
deiu: which got fixed
Arnaud: any other comments?
<codyb> We're happy with the charter.
Arnaud: we still need to get people to say they are at least OK with it
Ashok: I would personally like a little more enthusiasm, with people showing more interest in the group
ericP: we need to lean on outside
people, so they can lean on us
... we need them to be interested
... what about emailing the people on the attendance list?
Arnaud: I would maybe suggest
sending an email pointing to the new charter and asking if
they're OK with it.
... so who would like to do this?
<TallTed> "We revised our draft Charter based on our meetup. Does the new draft fit your wishes? Can/Will/Might you participate in new WG?"
Ashok: if we're OK with the charter, I can do it
Arnaud: so among the people present today, is everyone happy with the charter?
<codyb> +1 (happy)
bblfish: I am happy with it
Ashok: at the AC meeting I was approached by philA, and he mentioned access control
bblfish: yes, so without ACLs, you don't really have a distributed system
TallTed: ACLs are always an afterthought
ericP: should the notion of search be related to the HTTP search proposal?
Arnaud: it might, but I don't
think the charter needs to do that
... we could use it as a possible solution
<roger_> charter is looking promising from my perspective, but, I need to spend a bit more time with it
<Ashok> Roger, please comment soon
deiu: it would be nice if people would comment on the charter before getting on the call
TallTed: I don't think we should delete anything from the technical issues, nor from the deliverables
Arnaud: people should make their
proposals on the list, and deiu (as acting editor) will work
with them
... if we don't have all the required implementation reports in
the next 2 weeks, we will publish LD Patch as a note
bblfish: I would like to discuss a bit on HTTP SEARCH
Ashok: I'm not sure how to proceed w.r.t. IETF process
Arnaud: you should talk to Mark Nottingham who chairs the HTTP WG
Ashok: I can't go to their meeting in Prague, but one of our guys can
Arnaud: I think the way to do it is to contact Mark and ask him how to proceed
ericP: people on the HTTP WG are
there to preserve the status quo
... the challenge is to get other people to show up and say
they are excited about this
... we need to get people on the mailing group and get the
chair enthusiastic about it too
codyb: the pushback from Roy Fielding, was this on the mailing list? Does anyone have pointers?
Ashok: yes, I can point you to the email
<Ashok> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/
<ericP> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2015AprJun/0248.html
bblfish: the worry is that if you have a search endpoint, you're only going to go through that endpoint, instead of using the resource URIs
deiu: I would suggest we move this discussion on the mailing list
Arnaud: we should discuss on the
LDP mailing list until we have a unified point of view, and
then move to the IETF mailing list
... we don't want to appear divided
... I want to remind everyone that the important things to
consider right now are the charter and LD Patch -- we want to
freeze these within the next 2 weeks
[call adjourned]
<Arnaud> btw, I recommend people express explicit support for the charter by sending an email to the list
<Arnaud> rather than being silent
<Arnaud> trackbot, end meeting
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140 of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/a note/the note/ Found ScribeNick: deiu Inferring Scribes: deiu Default Present: codyb, deiu, Arnaud, MiguelAraCo, TallTed, +33.6.66.52.aaaa, Ashok_Malhotra, pchampin, +33.6.43.93.aabb, Roger, bblfish, ericP Present: codyb deiu Arnaud MiguelAraCo TallTed +33.6.66.52.aaaa Ashok_Malhotra pchampin +33.6.43.93.aabb Roger bblfish ericP WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 01 Jun 2015 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/06/01-ldp-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]