IRC log of vmtf on 2005-12-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:59:02 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #vmtf

13:59:02 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/12/06-vmtf-irc

13:59:03 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #vmtf

13:59:08 [RalphS]

zakim, this will be vmtf

13:59:08 [Zakim]

ok, RalphS; I see SW_BPD(VMTF)9:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute

13:59:16 [Zakim]

SW_BPD(VMTF)9:00AM has now started

13:59:19 [aliman]

hey ralph

13:59:22 [RalphS]

Meeting: SWBPD Vocab Management Task Force

13:59:23 [Zakim]

+??P0

13:59:43 [Zakim]

+Ralph

13:59:57 [RalphS]

zakim, ??p0 is Tom

13:59:57 [Zakim]

+Tom; got it

14:00:43 [Zakim]

+??P2

14:00:44 [Zakim]

+Alistair_Miles (was ??P2)

14:00:59 [aliman]

zakim, alistair is really me

14:00:59 [Zakim]

+aliman; got it

14:01:54 [RalphS]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Dec/0010.html

14:04:39 [danbri]

danbri has joined #vmtf

14:05:09 [TomB]

Dan, are you dialing in?

14:05:38 [danbri]

Yup, any sec

14:06:04 [RalphS]

Tom: likely regrets for next week (13 Dec)

14:06:29 [Zakim]

+Danbri

14:06:30 [RalphS]

s/13 Dec/12 Dec WG telecon/

14:07:21 [aliman]

TOPIC: 1. Updated Task Force Description:

14:07:34 [aliman]

tomb: can we approve it?

14:07:50 [aliman]

(new task force description: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/ )

14:08:04 [aliman]

aliman: I like it, happy to approve

14:08:12 [aliman]

tomb: no objections, so approved.

14:08:31 [aliman]

TOPIC 2: Editor's Draft "HTTP configuration cookbook"

14:08:33 [RalphS]

Previous: 2005-11-22

14:08:41 [aliman]

tomb: do we go for NOTE status?

14:08:49 [danbri]

(TF desc looks good to me)

14:09:30 [danbri]

(note that my affiliation won't be 'W3C' after 2005-12-31)

14:09:43 [aliman]

aliman: happy to go with Note, if davidw says it's better.

14:09:44 [danbri]

(I don't know what it will be next... :)

14:10:39 [aliman]

ralph: davidw said more likely to survive if NOTE status ...

14:10:57 [aliman]

but I don't know if that's a major factor, e.g. TR page has links to WDs not touched for a while ...

14:11:12 [aliman]

important declaration is: whether this work is done or not.

14:11:53 [aliman]

... e.g. we could declare this done, request NOTE status, and request next round of work looks at the same issues.

14:12:34 [aliman]

tomb: cookbook is self-contained work. Only concern is: are we confident the recipes work? Have they been tested enough?

14:12:59 [aliman]

ralph: I have exactly this concern. Still want to test on W3C servers. Maybe premature to suggest that it's Done right now.

14:13:09 [aliman]

danbri: not tested on the FOAF namespace.

14:13:18 [danbri]

...but i plan to!

14:13:45 [aliman]

tomb: reluctant to test on the DC namespaces. If we're happy it works, then I'm happy to recommend to OCLC to go with it. ...

14:14:12 [aliman]

are we confident it doesn't violate specs? We did one round with Vivien, and it survived that.

14:14:34 [aliman]

ralph: move to get WD published before xmas. Then sometime in Jan we consider whether to move to Note.

14:15:00 [aliman]

... socially better to publish as WD and ask for comments.

14:15:10 [aliman]

tomb: what process todo?

14:15:42 [aliman]

ralph: we need WG reviewers (davidb and andreas) to review it and make a recommendation to WG that this is or isn't ready for WD publication.

14:16:19 [aliman]

tomb: their names are already on record as volunteers for review.

14:16:30 [aliman]

ralph: email them, say we think this draft is ready for review.

14:16:54 [aliman]

ACTION: tomb to contact andreas and davidb re review for cookbook.

14:16:58 [danbri]

(I agree is good to have a WD before freezing a doc)

14:17:29 [aliman]

ralph: ask them to review before next monday's telecon? short notice.

14:17:48 [aliman]

.... next monday is probablyu last telecon this year.

14:18:05 [aliman]

... next after that is Jan 9 2006.

14:18:46 [aliman]

... If WG approves publication on Jan 9th, then earliest publication is 12/13 Jan, which gives almost no time for comment before end of charter.

14:19:29 [aliman]

... But it is likely to ask for WG extension for 1-2 month. We can ask reviewers to give an initial response by the 12 dec ...

14:20:31 [aliman]

then if reviewers give generally positive respnse on 12 dec, ask WG to give conditionaly approval to publish as WD ...

14:21:44 [TomB]

If they have issues with the draft, we would have to move the publication of a WD on Jan 9.

14:22:08 [aliman]

ralph: TF prepares docs for publication, then asks rest of WG to review and approve for publication ...

14:23:52 [TomB]

if they have no issues, feel comfortable with publishing WD conditional on David and Andreas

14:23:59 [TomB]

finishing the review and having no issues

14:26:42 [aliman]

ralph: say that: the TF feels this doc is ready for review. Given discussion last monday re Note vs. WD. Say that the TF would like to publish before xmas as WD, so we can get comments and address before going to note.

14:27:22 [TomB]

TF asks that they start their review. Like to publish before Xmas. Recognize they may not finish review by telecon 12 Dec.

14:27:36 [aliman]

... TF asks that they start their review, recognising that they may not be able to complete review by the telecon on 12 dec. So given their impressions on 12 dec, ask for conditional approval.

14:28:08 [aliman]

TOPIC: 4. (Time permitting) DCMI implementation scenario

14:28:50 [aliman]

http://dublincore.org/2005/06/13/dcq#Box

14:31:57 [aliman]

currently http://dublincore.org/2005/06/13/dcq#Box responds with text/plain

14:32:12 [RalphS]

s/redirects to/redirects to/ in Tom's email

14:32:21 [aliman]

should make sure http://dublincore.org/2005/06/13/dcq responds with application/rdf+xml

14:32:44 [aliman]

also should remove the #foo from redirects to http://dublincore.org/2005/06/13/dcq

14:34:26 [RalphS]

Alistair: re Vivien's comment last time about using built-in apache content negotiation

14:34:54 [RalphS]

... I realized that we choose not to use built-in content negotiation because apache requires that the files have the same root name and live in the same directory

14:35:26 [RalphS]

... and this limitation is not acceptable to the DCMI use case

14:36:15 [RalphS]

Tom: next telecon 20 Dec

14:36:27 [RalphS]

Alistair, DanBri: regrets for 20 Dec

14:39:45 [danbri]

(I'm aiming to have it implemented at foaf ns by end of year, fwiw.)

14:40:56 [Zakim]

-aliman

14:40:59 [Zakim]

-Tom

14:41:05 [Zakim]

-Danbri

14:41:16 [Zakim]

-Ralph

14:41:17 [Zakim]

SW_BPD(VMTF)9:00AM has ended

14:41:18 [Zakim]

Attendees were Ralph, Tom, Alistair_Miles, aliman, Danbri

14:42:15 [danbri]

oh, am seeing musicbrainz guys friday... they might be another candidate for using this...

14:42:37 [TomB]

danbri, you are going to Latin America?

14:43:43 [RalphS]

RESOLVED: next telecons 15 Dec and 5 Jan (both Thursdays)

14:43:51 [RalphS]

regrets from Tom for 15 Dec and from Alistair for 5 Jan

14:44:14 [danbri]

Tom, yep...

14:45:26 [RalphS]

I've updated the telecon reservations, moving our 20 Dec meeting to 15 Dec http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#D20051215

14:45:50 [RalphS]

and moving our 3 Jan meeting to 5 Jan http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#D20060105

14:46:47 [TomB]

ralphs, you will generate the usual draft meeting report?

14:52:27 [RalphS]

Previous: 2005-11-22 http://www.w3.org/2005/11/22-vmtf-minutes

14:52:33 [RalphS]

rrsagent, please draft minutes

14:52:33 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/12/06-vmtf-minutes.html RalphS

14:52:40 [TomB]

Thanks!

14:52:45 [RalphS]

rrsagent, please make this record public

15:01:57 [danbri]

danbri has left #vmtf

16:32:07 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #vmtf