Convene HTML WG meeting of 2007-07-12T17:00:00Z

<scribe> Scribe: DanC

DanC convened the meeting. There were no comments on the proposed agenda.

<DanC_> HTML WG participants, by member organization

<DanC_> DanC: I encourage new WG participants to fill out the tasks survey; there are a dozen or so tasks other than detailed spec review.

<DanC_> HTML WG tasks survey

Detailed Spec Reviews, progress update

<DanC_> review schedule

DanC: I'm still hoping to review the intro by 15 June, but it's somewhat at risk

hsivonen: the namespace section is one sentence; I did that. I'm on schedule for the other stuff.
... I sent some comments on the parsing section. see msgs with subject "detailed review"

<oedipus> Henri's Review

DanC: I think I saw some from Robert Burns. Has anyone seen these others that were estimated for June 30?

2007-06-30 Debi Orton

2007-06-30 Marco Neumann

2007-06-30 Robert Burns

DanC: review from Orton and others is still welcome.

<hsivonen> I've seen detailed review from myself, zcorpan, gsnedders and Rob Burns

DanC: goal is to have each section read by at least 2 WG members by the end of July or August
... I don't expect we'll fix the issues that get raised before publishing, but we'll have some knowledge of what we're publishing

Test suite organization

<gsnedders> I'm just converting the number tests over to JSON as we speak

http://esw.w3.org/topic/HtmlTestMaterials

<oedipus> use [test] as a subject-line marker, results posted to the list as part of the thread; one test per post

DanC: in another WG, we have aggregate test results from multiple implementations

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/test_results

hsivonen: Anne and Simon Pieters have done a bunch of good stuff; it would be nice to have a manifest. then the html5lib has the best parser tests; that's where contributions are going
... perhaps a simple manifest, conforming.txt that lists good files

DanC: there's collaboration logistics... and I'm obliged to bring up copyright/license issues sooner rather than later

hsivonen: some html5lib stuff is MIT/expat, some from google is Apache license
... copyright by individuals, I suppose

DanC: in order for this WG to use these tests, they should be contributed to the WG

<DanC_> Grant II: Grant of License for Contributed Test Cases Published Outside a W3C Recommendation

hsivonen: the existing licenses seem liberal enough; why do things have to move?

<jgraham_> If there's anything in html5lib that isn't MIT licensed it should be removed

DanC: The W3C test grant was worked out after a spec got stalled for months while license issues were worked out to the satisfaction of all concerned. I don't know if it's required, but I know it's expected and if we're to do anything different, I'd have to get it OK'd.
... There's also logisticts stuff... write access to the html5lib stuff?

hsivonen: Anne and James handle that

<jgraham_> html5lib write access is on an as-required basis at the moment.

<jgraham_> But the tests could always be hosted somewhere else

<DanC_> I'm interested in decentralized hosting using hg/bzr/git; I'm lobbying the W3C systems team to support hg.

Email traffic shaping

DanC: I asked for advice from the AtomPub chairs; their situation is similar to ours in that it's a large email-based collaboration. But there are differences too.
... Mostly, I encourage a few topics and tolerate everything else. Sometimes saying "stop talking about X" results in more discussion of X rather than less.

discussion of survival tactics in large mailing list...

<hsivonen> I find a mailing list easier to keep track of than wikis

<Julian> The noise ratio is a big problem; it's really easy to miss important announcements.

<arun> henri, are you able to follow all threads? are there threads you're watching more than usual?

<arun> +1 henri

<jgraham_> Big announcements could go on the homepage feed

<oedipus> convergence of wiki materials -- ESW and WHAT WG wikis need to at least be able to map to one another, running 2 wikis working on the same project sounds to me like a recipie for a migraine

<hsivonen> arun: I read all the messages to public-html.

<DanC_> big announcements do go on the WG homepage, but with a latency of ~1 week

<Julian> DanC: I guess the WG homepage needs an Atom feed, then :-)

Tutorial Development

DanC: 40+ ppl indicated interest, but we don't have a draft. I wonder if a mailing list would help.

further discussion was inconclusive

next teleconference?

next teleconference maybe in a week. i.e. the WG is hereby given its 7 day notice. An agenda or cancellation notice will go out by T-24hrs.

ADJOURN.

Action Review (postscript)

<DanC_> previous teleconference, 26 April

<scribe> ACTION: ChrisW to try to find a Seattle/OZ/Asia time [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/07/12-html-wg-minutes.html#action01]

<scribe> ACTION: DanC to call for forms tf volunteers (with review from John B.) [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/07/12-html-wg-minutes.html#action02]

<DanC_> forms task force volunteers? (tasks survey)

<scribe> ACTION: DanC to put the HTML spec baseline discussion by WBS in the next day or so [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/07/12-html-wg-minutes.html#action03]

<scribe> ACTION: DougS to review http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ProposedDesignPrinciples and advise the WG on whether to publish for community review, or whether critical problems remain [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/07/12-html-wg-minutes.html#action04]

<scribe> ACTION: IanH to review http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ProposedDesignPrinciples and advise the WG on whether to publish for community review, or whether critical problems remain [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/07/12-html-wg-minutes.html#action05]