See also: IRC log
<Stuart> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/01/15-minutes
minutes of 15 Jan 2009 approved
Henry will scribe next week
jar: I've looked at sitemeta and have a few comments
<Stuart> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-site-meta-00
<jrees> Eran's note: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hammer-discovery-00
zakim next agendum
jar: discovery has 3 components:
header, link header, link
... it's out of scope what the descriptor is
... the rationale section was good and well justified.
<DanC> (I find "Appendix A.2. Analysis")
jar: small comments, like resource
discovery -> resource descriptor discovery
... what if you get different metadata through different
methods.
<Stuart> http://www.w3.org/mid/760bcb2a0901220846s28848a89pf8851ba3408bbb8f@mail.gmail.com
jar: says you must produce the same description and location.
<DanC> (jar's comments, or at least some of them: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jan/0080.html )
jar: a large class of additional languages might want an html link equiv
tbl: presumably you could put the html:link in another language.
jar: I agree
johnkemp: you can use any link header
as long as it uses the link framework
... page 7 hammer-discovery-00
<masinter> the computation of the "base" of relative URIs is generic
<timbl> sorry pringingthe dco off
<timbl> doc
<masinter> style cascades
tbl: user can edit html doc, and would want multiple link headers
<masinter> someone is drying their hair
<masinter> much better
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask for a story involving real-world parties on the critcal path to deployment
<timbl> Sorry, for the noise
<Ashok> In an example related to the identity space, an end-user can use a URI as an identifier for signing into web services, and in turn, the web service can discover more information about the user's resources and preferences such as who did the user delegate their identity management to, where they keep their address book or list of social network friends, where their profile information is stored to reduce signup registration requirements, an
<timbl> I would suggest as an alternative: if the rtwo resource descriptors found though different paths of the 3 diffferent wy have the same information, then they should have the same URI to save the client looking up both.
<DanC> (still too many pronouns)
<Zakim> jrees, you wanted to answer dan with story
<DanC> (the canonical openid story is: I want to comment on a blog item that I just read, and rather than making a new username/password, I just use my openid)
jar: looked at openid in wikipedia.
goal is to reduce the number of registrations you provide. At a new
site is I use my magic string.
... I still have to authenticate, but I use one string across the
sites.
<DanC> (ecommerce is a bit of a stretch, given security properties of OpenID, but I'll stipulate for now)
<ht> Am I the only one who is confused as to why we are talking about OpenID?
jar: we're talking openid because Dan
wanted 1 story.
... rather than coming up with a new namespace, perhaps a person
could provide one string like a home page or mailto: uri.
<DanC> (using openid to find a public key... gee... you're not going to trust that connection, are you? )
jar: this can be used to find resource descriptors..
<masinter> there are no "name services" there are only "name lookup services". It's a common game to talk about "assigning names" when the truth is "promising service for name lookup"
I'll note there is a canonical mailto: URI to http URIs for openids.
masinter: people confuse name
assignment with name lookup
... same problems with dns, oids, ....
... what people are really getting is a promise that there will be
a server that can be used to find information.
... need to be clear about future service vs the name
... because the identity contains the scheme for how to get
information about the service (http:).
<DanC> (I find it hard to get motivated to look into the technical details until we know more about the market and deployment scenarios.)
masinter: Now we are asking what's
the way to get the metadata about the service.
... There can be many different locations for the link or relations
to the metadata about the service
... seems more likely that the different sources may have different
sources
<Stuart> +1 to what Larry just said
tbl: do you mean different but not
conflicting?
... this is all from the same site, the same dns name.
... stuff that comes demonstrably from the same source as the
doc
... different sites may have different parts under different
control
... they are different information
masinter: there is a spectrum from static to dynamic. for example rating is static
tbl: could also have something like subscription expiry
masinter: I wouldn't expect the spec to disallow conflicting information because it's likely to happen
ashok: different users have different access to resources
<timbl> That's true: Anotehr reason for having different metdata reource with different content is they may be accessible o diff categories of user.
ashok: metadata spec has an example of where the metadata is inside the representation.
<Zakim> jrees, you wanted to suggest that probably Eran wants to permit discoverers to stop when they find the first resource descriptor - in this protocol.
jar: the specs are trying to do 1
thing and do it well.
... obviously people can get metadata from everywhere.
... this gives a way to communicate information about the name of
the resource descriptor
... is this sufficient such as different mechanisms? no. This
doesn't work for all different file types? no.
... to ask it to look into pdf is making it too complicated
ashok: both specs talk about revised versions coming out. Let's take it up again.
<Stuart> close action-202
<trackbot> ACTION-202 Review http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-site-meta-00 closed
<masinter> suggest a more definitive action, e.g., to encourage W3C review of these drafts, or to track the discussion on some mailing list, or to start a new mailing list about it?
<DanC> issue-36: note http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-site-meta-00
<trackbot> ISSUE-36 Web site metadata improving on robots.txt, w3c/p3p and favicon etc. notes added
<DanC> issue-36: <jrees> Eran's note: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hammer-discovery-00
<trackbot> ISSUE-36 Web site metadata improving on robots.txt, w3c/p3p and favicon etc. notes added
<DanC> ("the mailing list that's talking about it" is which? I think it's www-talk for nottingham-site-meta , but I dunno for hammer-discovery )
skw: there's been a general interest in web community, and semantic web, about this area.
(didn't eran set up a mailist list for the discovery??)
<DanC> (dunno, dorchard ; haven't followed eran's work much at all, unfortunately.)
there's a discovery mailing list: metadata-discovery@googlegroups.com
on the discovery feedback, Eran said "Feedback would be highly appreciated either directly to me or on the www-talk@w3c.org mailing list."
<DanC> ah. good.
skw: jar's next steps?
jar: comments to Eran, keep
following
... I'm in conversation with lisa Dusseault(sp?) and mnot about
303s. very interesting
<masinter> Lisa Dusseault
<masinter> Dusseault
<masinter> sorry
<DanC> (I didn't manage to propose anything re squatting nor x-tokens, re ACTION-211 ; I'm OK to withdraw if there's critical mass of support to publish the current draft)
mark baker produced a branch draft, henry has commented on that
skw: have your comments been addressed henry?
ht: I don't think Noah has done the
cleanup on the (g?)rddl example.
... should only take 30 seconds to fix the grddl example.
<noah_waltham> No, Mark did not produce a branch draft. I did, in response to concern from Mark. Henry has since suggested further changes, which are fine with me.
ht: wrt noahs? (should be mark bakers?) I agree with the first part but not the new paragraph.
<noah_waltham> Yes, I have agreed to do GRDDL cleanup, but it's not done yet.
<noah_waltham> No, I'm not aware that Mark did a draft. I did.
<DanC> (ht's alternative, I suppose: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jan/0078.html )
<noah_waltham> Henry is accepting first sentence of my branch draft change, replacing the larger change at the end of 4.2.3. Again, I am agreeable to Henry's proposed change.
ht: if you are concerned with the xslt example, the problem is the root element is not in the xslt namespace.
<DanC> DanC: the XSLT literal result issue isn't addressed, but maybe I'm OK to publish anyway
<masinter> RFC 3023 says " The W3C, and the W3C XML Core Working Group, have change control
<masinter> over the XML specification."
ht: there is an issue we haven't addressed which is that comments on self description wrt a live full blown xml document and don't treat xml documents (scribe loses the thread)
<timbl> Not as themselves?
dc: something might look like a check element but it's not
<masinter> Well, I was puzzled by the characterization of the "issue" was over what RFC 3023 says. The issue is what the XML specification says (or rather, doesn't say)
ht: xslt ought to have a media type for when xslt is embedded inside xml
dc: self-describing web breaks down when....
<DanC> Vendor publiseshes po-template.xml
dc: vendor co publishes po template.xml
<DanC> as application/xml
<DanC> and the root element bears http://vencorco.example/po namespace
<DanC> and below the root it has XSLT goo
this is the same problem with documents that contain xinclude and is the generic xml processing model problem.
still!
vendorco has a place for extensions including xslt and example line items
ht: purchase order contains minimum 4
tables, so template contains 4 tables.
... xslt wg didn't have a leg to stand on when they said it's not a
purchase order
<masinter> the nature of the conversation confuses me; it's as if the TAG is trying to decide what (ambiguous) documents meant based on what they said, rather than just trying to update them to be clearer and what they *should* say
<jrees> danc: I don't think it's a critical bug to fix, but it would be nice to have a paragraph about it
<noah_waltham> Please keep in mind that, while the finding surely has to be accurate, the point is to teach about self-description and URI-based extensibility, not to dive deep on nuances of 3023 and XML.
<jrees> danc: content with no change
<Norm> The salient point here being the observation that XSLT template documents must have an xsl:version attribute on the root element.
danc: content because the root element must have the xslt version attribute
<noah_waltham> Also: given that I won't be on the call for a few mins, please keep in mind that I will be very dependent on the minutes being clear as to what, if any changes have been "agreed"
<DanC> +1 new para in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jan/0078.html
<jrees> there was a missing " ... i sent email to www-tag just now
<ht> Propose to ask the editor to publish after 1)
<ht> Fixing the GRDDL example;
<ht> 2) Adopting my proposed final para for 4.3.2
<DanC> +1 ammendment from jar
<DanC> +1 ammendment from jar http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jan/0067.html
<jrees> 3) change the sentence containing "owl:sameAs" so that it uses an OWL-DL example (see email from jar to noah)
<jrees> i want to give noah lots of freedom here
noah: I want less freedom not more. I'd like specific wordings
<jrees> ok, for less freedom, just use one of my suggestions.
jar: as proposed
dc: as proposed
<noah_waltham> The branch draft URI http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/selfDescribingDocuments-3023.html
noah: as proposed = with 3 changes?
<jrees> yes
noah: fine any way, as proposed is fine
norm: fine
skw: fine with 3 changes
tbl: concur
dc: tbl, please offer informed opinion
<DanC> (one of my hesitations is that I don't know what the "GRDDL example" is)
<masinter> if the question is whether to publish the document as a finding: my opinion is that I would likely have lots of comments on the document and raise numerous issues and you should publish it quickly so I don't have a chance to do that.
<noah_waltham> Proposal: we will publish SDW as proposed in http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/selfDescribingDocuments-3023.html with 3 changes 1) last para of 4.2.3 as proposed by Henry 2) GRDDL example vcard reference 3) one of Jonathan's proposed changes for RDF
<jrees> noah, (as i said in recent email) please add missing " in 5.2 "http://example.org/GRDDL_For_employeeNS.xsl> ... i don't think anyone will object
<noah_waltham> Noah will review final version with Henry.
<noah_waltham> Proposal: we will publish SDW as proposed in http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/selfDescribingDocuments-3023.html with 3 changes 1) last para of 4.2.3 as proposed by Henry 2) GRDDL example vcard reference 3) one of Jonathan's proposed changes for RDFa
skw: calling the question on noah's proposal
<noah_waltham> Proposal: we will publish SDW as proposed in http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/selfDescribingDocuments-3023.html with 3 changes 1) last para of 4.2.3 as proposed by Henry 2) GRDDL example vcard reference 3) one of Jonathan's proposed changes for OWL sameAs
<DanC> Jan 19 23:03:23 2009 UTC is the date of http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/selfDescribingDocuments-3023.html
skw: any objections?
tbl: worried about the diagram?
... pathological the same.
noah: I think I got some help from Norm on the diagram sizing.
tbl: it's been made to fit but it doesn't quite work with the ?function de-ref?
noah: document denotes URI should go down
<DanC> (I can't read the diagram and wouldn't miss it if were gone, FWIW)
skw: I think I'm hearing an objection from tbl.
<noah_waltham> Proposal: we will publish SDW as proposed in http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/selfDescribingDocuments-3023.html with 3 changes 1) last para of 4.2.3 as proposed by Henry 2) GRDDL example vcard reference 3) one of Jonathan's proposed changes for OWL sameAs 4) rearrange diagram so dref is clearly the input
<noah_waltham> Norm: I will work on it.
<DanC> +1 Jan 19 23:03:23 2009 UTC draft + 4 changes
<ht> HST has to leave in a minute, I'm happy with the way this is going
<timbl> I can review it tomorrow at 10:00 ET
<noah_waltham> Norm: can you have a diagram by 1);00 ET tomorrow?
skw: calling the question on the latest proposal?
<noah_waltham> Norm: can you have a diagram by 10:00 ET tomorrow?
no objections
no abstentions
woot woot!
noah: thanks for the support over the past 18 months
<DanC> (I count the critical path at: norm, noah, ht)
no objections from TAG members
no abstentions from TAG members
<DanC> (the due part goes at the end)
<noah_waltham> ACTION: Noah to publish SDW finding, with 4 changes as noted in minutes of 22 Jan 2009 tag telcon due 29 jan 2009 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/01/22-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-216 - Publish SDW finding, with 4 changes as noted in minutes of 22 Jan 2009 tag telcon due 29 jan 2009 [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2009-01-29].
<DanC> "Cross-Origin Resource Sharing"
<timbl> Norm, get it in the middle
<timbl> 'deref' is the entry point
<DanC> "Cross-Origin Resource Sharing"
dc: tbl, you objected to "access control" so I took a follow up action.
tbl: that's much better
<DanC> close ACTION-203
<trackbot> ACTION-203 Discuss Access Control misnomer with Interaction Domain staff closed
<masinter> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-origin-00
<masinter> was just published yesterday
<masinter> also http://webblaze.cs.berkeley.edu/2009/origin/origin.xml
<DanC> action-203: wg discussion of renaming spec includes http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/0068.html from anne
<trackbot> ACTION-203 Discuss Access Control misnomer with Interaction Domain staff notes added
<masinter> also http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2009JanMar/0036.html
<Stuart> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jan/0064
skw: I've been chatting with them
about de-referencing resources from widgets
... no need to make references into widget packages.
<DanC> (sigh... I completely missed stuart's message, as it had an irrelevant subject of Re: Sketch of an idea to address widget/package addressing with fragID syntax and media-type defn )
<Stuart> FWIW, we have removed all requirements for Widgets to be
<Stuart> embeddable into Web documents. Widgets, as currently being defined by the
<Stuart> Widgets 1.0 Family of Specifications, are solely packaged standalone
<Stuart> client-side applications that are authored using Web technologies.
<masinter> there's a mailing list on this topic at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pkg-uri-scheme/2009Jan/ . I'd had an action item which I'm late on, to announce this mailing list in IETF
<noah_waltham> Noah wants to remind himself that Jonathan sent an email on 22 Jan noting one more typo in Self-describing Web. It will be fixed before publication. Thank you Jonathan!
<Zakim> timbl, you wanted to argue for allowing N of these and to
masinter: I proposed getting a bunch of groups together that are separately working on this area and seeing if there is a common ground.
skw: the mailing list is a venue for that discussion
<DanC> (I'm surprised Marcos agreed to talk requirements with other groups; it's already clear to me that ebook and widgets don't share requirements.)
<DanC> (for reference: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pkg-uri-scheme/ )
<DanC> (I think a telcon might help a lot; these communities have disconnected vocabularies)
<johnk> dorchard: do you have a link to the blog entry?
<jrees> it's linked from my wiki page... i'll get that link
I suggest getting a wiki together and even a comparison
<johnk> thanks
<jrees> http://esw.w3.org/topic/FindingResourceDescriptions
I note that Eran's wor of doing a blog entry comparing various discovery techniques was very useful.
<jrees> (or belowmentioned)
<DanC> ISSUE-20: Postel's law, dealing with invalid content, TInkerbell effect Larry Masinter http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jan/0075.html
<trackbot> ISSUE-20 What should specifications say about error handling? notes added
Eran's blog post is http://www.hueniverse.com/hueniverse/2008/09/discovery-and-h.html
<Norm> timbl, after the call, can you hang about for a few minutes
meeting adjourned
<Norm> 2:30 meeting cancelled. I can finally get off the phone. Tea. I want tea.
<DanC> ah... tea... yes...
tim, still some questions for you about your visit...