Re: agenda for TAG meeting 8-10 Dec in progress

Re:  Metadata
We are expecting a draft document from Jonathan Dec 1
Here are the pointers to background reading
- Web Linking (Common registry and the HTTP Link header) 
header):http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-06
- Well-Known URIs
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-site-meta-04
- Host-meta
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hammer-hostmeta-04
- LRDD
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hammer-discovery-03

Re:  WebApps Architecture
Raman, Larry and I have been working on a draft document.  Early 
versions are on the tag mailing list.
Should have something better by next week.
All the best, Ashok


noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:
>>  If you know more than what tracker knows
>>     
>
> Having been out of the office for 12 days, there's a fair amount that I 
> need to go through when I get back next week.  That said:  nothing 
> specific comes to mind, but I do have some higher level goals for the F2F 
> that I hope you'll at least consider.  Basically:
>
> * Goal:  Figure out the success critera for our work on Web Application 
> Architecture, and whether our results on that should be more than the sum 
> of the parts.  It would be good if we started to have some thoughts about 
> the form of our results, even if the answer is just to do scattered emails 
> and findings;  I still think there is a chance that an AWWW Vol 2 and/or 
> updates to Vol 1, might be a good way to go for Web Apps.  I am not 
> necessarily pushing for lots of meta-discussion about such things.  I 
> would like to see the vast majority or even all of of our time on Web apps 
> devoted to technical discussion.  With luck, some insights about the whole 
> will emerge from that.  Nonetheless, this is probably my top priority "as 
> chair".  Also, I wonder whether we should also do some looking at that 
> Table of Contents from June to see whether it inspires anyone to dive into 
> new topics, and thus to accept some new actions (before or during the 
> F2F.)
>
> * Goal: clarify our interest is in metdata, and make sure our actions are 
> well aligned with those goals.  I think we are doing some good stuff in 
> this space, and all of it may be well covered by existing actions and 
> ISSUE-62 and ISSUE-63.  Nonetheless, I tend to get some odd vibes from the 
> group when metadata comes up.  Some people say: "beware, that's all of 
> computer science".  Some seem interested specifically in one of the two 
> issues but don't want the TAG spending time on the other.  So, I hope we 
> can come out with some TAG consensus on what our priorities are.
>
> In both cases, it would be nice to have a general sense of what success 
> criteria are for, say, the next 3-6 months.  Again, if we can get there by 
> mostly following tracker and assigning/discussing the appropriate actions, 
> that's just fine with me. 
>
> Noah
>
> --------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn 
> IBM Corporation
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> 1-617-693-4036
> --------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
> Sent by: www-tag-request@w3.org
> 11/24/2009 03:58 PM
>  
>         To:     www-tag@w3.org
>         cc:     (bcc: Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM)
>         Subject:        agenda for TAG meeting 8-10 Dec in progress
>
>
> Today is T-2 weeks, so our agenda is due.
>
> If you know more than what tracker knows, let me know right away.
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda
>
> That page knows everything I know except for a
> few thoughts from recent phone calls.
>
> I'll be organizing it into an agenda page today.
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 25 November 2009 00:04:56 UTC