<DanC_lap> how about side chat? mix it in here or encourage it to go elsewhere by making #tp-backchannel and noting it in the /topic ?

<raman> Morning all

<Steven> hi Raman

<mauro> morning raman

<DanC_lap> morning raman. any opinion about side chat?

<raman> I'd rather see it all in one place.

<raman> in the spirit of side-chat == marginal notes, and that margins can often hold important proofs ;-)

<mauro> +1 to raman

<DanC_lap> I hear pepole who haven't been given the password are gathering in #tpac

<Mez> well go over there and tell them they're in the wrong place

<amy> what does "given the password" mean?

<ht> this channel is pw-protected, I was told

<amy> isn't it available to anyone attending?

<maxf> it's not on the agenda

<Mez> normal people needed a password to get here amy

<DanC_lap> I went over there (#tpac); the topic doesn't suggest they're in the wrong place, and the people there are not just the disenfranchised.

<amy> sorry, Mez, wasn't questioning who can get on, just questioning where the info should be! sorry, being logistical :)

<Mez> sorry if I sounded rude; must be my irc voice :-)

<amy> :)

<raman> her irked voice;-)

<Mez> ouch!

<DanC_lap> amy, the password hasn't been announced, I'm pretty sure. ah. there. steve is announcing it.

<amy> ah, ok, good

<raman> one web to bind them all

<raman> one irc chanel to gather them all

<Mez> raman you slay me

<jallan> beantown

<mauro> ===============

<Rafa> join #tp beantown

<mauro> Steve Bratt welcomes everybody and goes through the agenda of the week

<raman> all it takes is a bad talk to get a lot of boos ;-)

<Mez> bad pun man

<Hixie> anyone know the username/password for the imaginarytime captioning?

<maxf> Hi ivan!

<DS> help /wave

<ted> we are doing an experimental audio broadcast of today @ http://media.w3.org:8000/stream.ogg and http://media.w3.org/stream.html includes an ogg vorbis java applet client

<mauro> Feedback on the 2007 Technical Plenary and Advisory Committee meetings week (TPAC2007)

<karl> hmmmmm steve bratt didn't mention that people could blog about the session today

<karl> http://www.w3.org/QA/2007/11/tpac-2007-lets-start

<raman> he didn't say we couldn't -- so there

<DanC_lap> no? I thought he just did [encourage blogging], Karl

<karl> If you are taking photos, blogging, etc. use one of these tags "tpac, tpac2007, w3c, w3c_tpac07"

Session 2: View from the Outside: Real World Perspectives on the W3C

<maxf> Hixie, any password any login work

<karl> DanC_lap: then I have to wake up ;)

<maxf> http://www.captionedtext.com/client/event.aspx?CustomerID=732&EventID=863005&ParticipantId=35e14a7c-868f-4405-b1e6-fb7ec1187b14

<maxf> pretty cool!

<mauro> ===========

<mauro> Molly E. Holzschlag (Web Standards and Practices Education and Outreach, Molly.Com, Inc.)

<Hixie> maxf: cool

<mauro> Session 2: View from the Outside: Real World Perspectives on the W3C

<Mez> the tower; my least favorite card in the tarot deck

<Julian> join tp beantown

<raman> how do you build a tower out of ivory ... have always wondered ...

<Mez> lots of sad, dead elephants (I don't "read" it as an ivory tower; that's Molly's call)

<fantasai> raman: you'd need some other material to bind it

<raman> Whos' the large elephant in the room that no one can see;-)

<mauro> Molly E. Holzschlag introduces Aaron Gustafson (Easy! Designs, Inc.)

<fantasai> but concrete towers aren't all concrete anyway; they're also part steel

<mauro> Molly E. Holzschlag introduces Patrick Haney (Harvard)

<raman> captioning should create better minutes/transcripts

<mauro> Molly E. Holzschlag introduces Matthew Oliphant (MathWorks)

<maxf> fantasai, we're trying to show we can do better collaboratively ;)

<mauro> Molly E. Holzschlag introduces Stephanie Troeth (CloudRaker)

<AaronGustafson> I am one of the panelists and will be trying to keep an eye on this channel for remote questions during the Q&A period. I can't guarantee we'll be able to get to all of them, but we will certainly try.

<Mez> I didn't quite follow all the intros, but it looks like several folks are in http://www.webstandards.org/

<Mez> steph, my specialty interest is usable security (we're working a standard in that area in WSC). Did I catch right that you are in WaSP? Is there anything going on in an area related to usable security there?

<raman> would be nice if captioning were available as a simple separate IRC channel.

<steph> Mez: i was in the WaSP :) perhaps let's catch up after this.

<Mez> great

<raman> the default on that web site is to refresh transcripts every second --- sounds like overkill

<raman> room is echoing -- acoustically not a good room

<MikeSmith> AaronGustafson - having trouble hearing Molly

<raman> w3c specifications were never intended for use by end authors -- they've always been targetted at implementors. Confusing the audience leads to bad specifications

<fantasai> anne, yeah, I agree that a lot of our specs could be written better but it's very unlikely that we can write them precisely enough for implementors and metaphorically enough for authors

<fantasai> authors should be reading derived material

<karl> anne, if web designers and web developers do not have to read the spec. Then there is a missing piece that web developers/designers still needs. I think it is the crux of the comment. "We have to read the spec because there's no other source."

<anne> i think they should work for pedantic authors, not for average authors

<LeeF> In imaginaryity (well, IME), though, the derivative materials don't exist early enough to let non-implementors participate in the consensus / review process

<raman> I always compile with gcc --pedantic -- but I've never read the ANSI standard for C

<ivan> dom, what is the user/password for the captioning?

<karl> the message is "hey we want to understand your stuff". "your stuff is created at W3C". "where on w3c site can I find help for editing."

<MikeSmith> KevinLawver - probably the same thing that would happen to the anti-virus industry if ...

<anne> that said, the technology should be simple enough to use for average authors, obviously

<Steven> ivan, there is no user/pass

<anne> intuitive, if you will

<fantasai> and the terminology in the interface/API/syntax should be targetted at them

<dom> ivan, you just have to sell your sour^W^W^W enter your name and companie's name

<anne> karl, don't people write books and tutorials on how to do stuff all the time?

<karl> anne, reference point.

<karl> http://www.captionedtext.com/client/event.aspx?CustomerID=732&EventID=863005&ParticipantId=35e14a7c-868f-4405-b1e6-fb7ec1187b14

<steph> anne: often it's a case of too much information, not always consistent

<AaronGustafson> please send questions direct to me

<moshe> I wrote a book that mentions the values of standards... by analogy to 150 years ago, when manufacturers accepted standard sizes for nuts and bolts.

<timbl_> So W3C should produce materials to he;p developer's *managers* understand why the w3C technology is important

<AaronGustafson> will make it easier to keep track

<raman> the stumbling block has not been lack of educational materials -- the problem has been lack of good interoperable implementations that work like what the educational materials try to teach

<raman> dont think we should produce things for managers ... Darwin will take care of clueless managers over time;-)

<fantasai> AaronGustafson: see KevinLawver's comments above

<karl> raman, that is true. ANd there is also the high variability of quality in books.

<Hixie> (is there an offtopic irc channel to where we should repair the general chat?)

<maxf> that's how you learn!

<raman> and people are still doing browser-specific code -- he's making it sound like that was all in the past...

<anne> well, interop is certainly a problem

<MikeSmith> Hixie - #tp ?

<John_Boyer> Seem to need more participation on the *public* mailing lists. Discussion is invited in the status of the document.

<anne> testcases anyone?

<s-mon> +1 to raman.

<Hixie> MikeSmith: fair enough :-)

<DanC_lap> re platform for innovation... that's my motivation for chairing the HTML WG

greetings from San Francisco

<RCutler> There are multiple levels of indirection between standards and the managers who make the $ commitmeents. That doesn't make them clueless, but it does mean that it is difficult for you to target them.

<raman> Hey Tantek!

<moshe> standards do not inhibit innovation. standard nuts and bolts in automobiles let the designers focus on overall form and function instead of creating custom nuts and bolts.

<steph> moshe: +1

<Mez> if you have a standards effort that is a response to a vulnerability, there can be innovation that relies on that vulnerability

hey Raman. regrets I could not be there in person.

<timbl_> tantek, pity you coudn't be herein person

<mjs> hi tantek

<Mez> all those custom bolt people can no longer innovate in bolts

<raman> tantek: we miss you (':' intentionally used)

<steph> our green light appears to be stuck

<KevinLawver> The general web development community's (of which I'm a part) frustration is NOT with the standard itself. It's with browsers (like TV said). They're tired of waiting for things like multiple backgrounds, border radius, display: table, a "imaginary" layout system, etc.

<moshe> Mez, this whole panel discussion sounds like the descriptions of the first meetings when people discussed adopting standardized nuts and bolts. Same arguments.

<John_Boyer> standards accelerate innovation by increasing aperture of information flow (not just data flow)

<mjs> KevinLawver: sounds like when you say "browsers" you mean "Internet Explorer"

<KevinLawver> We mostly understand the benefits, but the definition of "standards" to almost all of my colleagues is "the hacks I have to use to make it work in IE" not the specs themselves.

<raman> browsers should focus on doing standards right -- rather than continuously aiming for bug-compatibility across browsers

<RCutler> How long ago were nuts and bolts standardized? Is this imaginaryly in living memory?

<moshe> no, it was in the 1850's

<moshe> so we have some reports

timbl_: thanks and agreed. i will do my best to participate thru IRC. i also have an iSight and Skype/iChat with sufficient bandwidth if there is someone near the front of the room willing to share.

<anne> raman, supporting existing content is important, especially to our end users

<raman> if nuts and bolts were done today's web-browser way, we'd all carry around bagfuls of wrenches out of fear that you'd run into a badly designed legacy bolt any minute

<Mez> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,741291,00.html

<John_Boyer> Anne, existing content is not expressed in the new versions of the language

<mjs> supporting existing content is the way you get to have enough end users to fund implementing standards

<John_Boyer> good

<steph> hehehe

<DanC_lap> "very disheartened by the massive gaps". I think we can do better about managing expectations around HTML and CSS schedules. more on that Saturday in the HTML WG meeting.

<raman> anne -- support existing content all you like -- but as long as that remains the focus, as opposed to say "doing html and css right" --- people will continue to author more junk for you to "support" and that is a death spiral

<MikeSmith> I'm surprised that Alex Russell is surprised that standards aren't very good at innovating and inventing.

<raman> think "support" == "tolerate";-)

<Hixie> DanC_lap: we're going to adopt my original proposed timetable? :-D

<DanC_lap> heh.

<hsivonen> does dojo even work in application/xhtml+xml?

<DanC_lap> I do think we should talk about your proposed timetable and mine.

<moshe> During WWII, the US auto companies had to run a separate production line for the Brits, since the US and Brits had separate standards for nuts and bolts. The US standard was better, btw, from a tech standpoint.

<mjs> standards are better at standardizing things that already exist than at innovating

<MikeSmith> Heresy or naivetè?

<mjs> (and cleaning off the rough edges)

<John_Boyer> It is impossible to reach for higher goals without a higher platform.

<KevinLawver> @hsivonen No, it doesn't, because no one in the "imaginary" web uses application/xhtml+xml. Dojo is very pragmatic.

<Hixie> (CSS2 would be in candidate recommendation as well if CR had existed back then)

<anne> raman, we're actively improving the HTML and CSS standards at the W3C, but there's only so many resources

<DanC_lap> I mostly side with mjs re standards and when to start a W3C WG [when you're ready to share test cases, basically], but I think a mix of more optimistic perspectives is also healthy.

<shepazu> bingo.

<anne> (improving them to meet imaginary world constraints)

the processing model of application/xhtml+xml has never been sufficiently defined to provide similar functionality to the de facto processing model of text/html

<shawn> +1 to open, but not well communicated

<s-mon> indeed.

<Mez> John_Boyer, I'm reminded of the stories of my ex-USSR colleagues back in the late 80's. they said in the USSR they carried tapes of their own tools they wrote (editors, compilers) from job to job

<Hixie> tantek: html5 is working on that. it'll take a while though.

<shepazu> the process is open, but we need to clarify how to do that... that's a big push I'll be doing with the new SVG Interest Group

<RCutler> That sounds like stealing to me.

<DanC_lap> the "there's only so many resources" line is a pet pieve of mine. It means "I'm tired of recruiting" or something.

Hixie, is that html5 or xhtml5? :)

<maxf> it's a shame we can't complete the [indiscernible] bits in the live transcript

<Hixie> tantek: yes. :-)

<MikeSmith> Fun to play the heretic but not terrifically productive

<Hixie> tantek: but i meant "html 5" the spec.

<FABLET> join #tp beantown

<maxf> http://www.captionedtext.com/client/event.aspx?CustomerID=732&EventID=863005&ParticipantId=35e14a7c-868f-4405-b1e6-fb7ec1187b14

<Hixie> tantek: (as opposed to html5 the serialisation)

<raman> I said it at the time "amsterdam 2000" and I still say it -- forking out the html mime time and creating application/xml+xhtml was just a major mistake. We should have put in the framework in place using the DOM as it existed to help text/html transition smoothly to clean content.

<karl> http://flickr.com/search/?s=rec&q=w3c&m=tags

raman: +1

<shepazu> w3c needs to do more "marketing" of the spec, including tutorials and working more closely with designers and developers

<anne> WHATWG FTW!!!

<FABLET> join #tp [beantown]

<Hixie> FABLET: you're in #tp already :-)

Hixie: +1. (as happened clearly with microformats as well)

<Hixie> indeed

<glazou> hey tantek :)

<DanC_lap> re waterfall... yeah... I made that point in public-html ...

<raman> Today we're heading down the same death spiral that in the mid-90's eventually caused browsers to become incapable of handling correct content given their kluges to handle bad content

<anne> raman, not imaginaryly

<shepazu> it depends on what you mean by marketing... it can just be a matter of communication

<Hixie> shepazu: certainly there should be information available, i just mean push marketing

<anne> raman, we're getting closer to a model that handles both, CSS has had that for years, HTML is getting it now

raman: what makes you say that? from where I sit, we are heading towards browsers that handle more and more semantic content on the Web. a richer experience with every veresion.

<mjs> to the extent browsers are changing, it's mainly towards more standards-compliance

<moshe> I dare you to read the Xforms spec and try to figure out, from the intro, just what the spec is supposed to do.

<DanC_lap> "Concurrent iteration is a bit chaotic, but a strict

<DanC_lap> waterfall approach seems like a poor use of available resources." -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Jul/0378.html

<shepazu> Hixie: I agree on the whole, but there can be coordination efforts with our members

<Mez> reading specs is like reading Shakespeare; it's a specialty kind of thing that only comes with practice

<AnnBassetti> and the average person won't do it

<Hixie> shepazu: there can, my argument is that there shouldn't be.

<Mez> perhaps we should perform our specs...

<KevinLawver> Do we need to start doing SCRUM in working groups?

<Marcos> the specs would be 20 times bigger and would take twice as long to make if we have to cater for designers.

<moshe> Mez, I think I should be able to pick up a spec and figure out what it's supposed to accomplish. I shouldn't have to go to Wikipedia to figure it out

<glazou> KevinLawver: agreed (about the 3-5 years)

<shepazu> KevinLawver: then we'd end up with scrumlords

<DanC_lap> I find studying things like SCRUM worthwhile

<Hixie> shepazu: otherwise you create a fake bubble of hype and get caught up in it -- and fail to see feedback from the audience when they say the spec doesn't address their needs. we've seen that before in w3c.

<Mez> why can't there be an overlay to specs for "normal"people (to Marcos comment)

<moshe> Just one paragraph, Mez, that's all I ask

<KevinLawver> @shepazu Isn't that what chars are supposed to be anyway?

<mjs> specs are not software

<KevinLawver> Sorry, chairs.

<John_Boyer> Doing scrum in working groups might clarify who the specs are for (and who they're not for). This panel is illustrating the need for a spec for implementers and a primer for users of the implementations

<mjs> software development methodologies do not necessarily apply

<shawn> +1 to considering SCRUM like trial...

<Mez> ok moshe, I'll try to get that one paragraph in WSC

<LeeF> +1 to spec & primer

<Mez> what does it need to address?

<moshe> "This spec allows me to..."

<Mez> got it

<KevinLawver> I'd hate to write Molly, Eric Meyer and others out of a job. ;)

<raman> I must say the IRC chat is more interesting than the panel ... or is it just me?

<moshe> Or something else that explains the basic concept

<DanC_lap> "test cases, you know, use cases" . Amen! story telling and test cases.

<shepazu> Hixie: agreed, it shoudl be communication of imaginary functionality, not hype... things like imaginary-world conformance matrices to show what works where

<anne> testcases ftw too, indeed

<dom> agile software development method for project management.

<DanC_lap> glazou, my lightning talk is about test cases... vote for it, please.

<shepazu> test suites are becoming much more important, at least in the Interaction domain

<KevinLawver> We're going to start doing this in CSS - looking at user-based design and coming up with personas and use cases for the specs to provide a good user-base relevant portal to CSS.

<Hixie> shepazu: yeah that would be very useful

<glazou> DanC_lap: sure

<DanC_lap> ooh... Karl, Oliver, how about that for at tile? "Story Telling and Test Cases"

<karl> hehe

<dom> The mobile web test suites working group has set up a test harness that allows to collect results from test suites: http://www.w3.org/2007/03/mth/harness , results at http://www.w3.org/2007/03/mth/results

<clc4tts> where is the voting anyway?

<s-mon> but it seems the community is perpetuationg the perception. how do you change a perception that you, yourself, are perpetuationg.

<dom> (it's primarily targeted at mobile web browsers, but works alright with desktop browsers as wellà

<KevinLawver> Well, two out of three blames being accurate's not bad. ;)

<karl> DanC_lap: we still have to do the slides. That will be a lightning Slides Editing from olivier and me, maybe followed by lightning talks :p

<KevinLawver> I never blame myself. It's always the browser's fault.

<shepazu> Hixie: specifically, conformance matrices that pull together different specs, like HTML, CSS, SVG, etc... so they just have to look in one place, not a dozen

<Bert> Too often, when people say {W3C, a WG} doesn't listen to users, they mean it doesn't listen to "them* :-(

<matt> clc4tts, voting for the Lightning Talk Wild Card was going to be done via IRC during the second session of LTs.

<shepazu> ... obviously, with some filtering available.... ;)

<clc4tts> thanks matt

<s-mon> Bert, exactly.

<matt> No problem. Actually, if I could get a volunteer for tabulating the votes I would appreciate it.

<Mez> does anyone know of usabiity testing that's integrated with recommendaitons in a standard? we're grappling with that in WSC

<Mez> and have only found "process" oriented UT standards (this is how you should run a UT)

<RCutler> I question that common goals and consistent priorities are possible or desirable in an organization like this.

<KevinLawver> Why hasn't anyone just come out and said this is all Microsoft's fault? ;)

<karl> http://www.technorati.com/search/www.w3.org/2007/11/TPAC

<glazou> KevinLawver, because everyone knows about it !-) no need to repeat !

<mjs> KevinLawver: more polite to say "browsers"

<glazou> mjs: pfffff

<KevinLawver> But, mjs, it's not accurate. Is it?

<steph> Mez: i imagine you're thinking of heuristics, but that's a moving target, isn't it?

<mjs> KevinLawver: well, there are compat differences and standards compliance bugs in SafOperFox too, but they are much closer to standards and to each other than to IE

<mjs> it's unclear how to define 100% support

<glazou> Yves, on our dead bodies !-)

<raman> Problem started withnetscape;-) in general the dominant browser has always been buggy and everyone has made the problem worse over time by being bug compatible

<mjs> is there any non-trivial standard that's less than 20 years old and can claim to have 100% support from anything?

<mjs> even C compilers have standards compliance bugs

<glazou> mjs: electricity

<anne> Yves, when they stop "sucking" and come with millions of testcases this might be feasible :)

<raman> if gcc were like browsers, we would first ask all failing CS students to submit their programs -- and then build a compiler that compiled all the code from the failing student's ;-)

<Mez> steph, we're trying to figure out both ways to "verify" that our recommendations will be sufficiently "usable", and also what to tell people about ensuring their implementation of our recommendations are suffiiciently "usable"

<MikeSmith> It seems like there is maybe an expectation among some users/readers that all specs should somehow be understandable/readable by non-implementors or those who don't understand the implementation complexities ... an unimaginaryistic expectation. The answer is maybe: You're not going to understand some specs unless you have certain prior knowledge that it may likely be you don't have unless you're an implementor or or have worked in some way a browser or other U

<MikeSmith> A or developed complex web apps or whatever.

<mjs> glazou: I don't think that meets the "non-trivial" standard

<Yves> anne: well it more than millions of test cases that are needed ;)

<hsivonen> btw, the model Molly just referred to keeps the test results secret

<mjs> raman: gcc is different because what's delivered to end-users is binaries, not source

<mjs> therefore breaking source compat for standards compliance can be livable, after all, users still have the old binaries

<shepazu> "SafOperFox"... ugh... Mopari, maybe? ;)

<glazou> mjs: ah ? have you ever been at a CEI standardization meeting about electricity ?

<raman> gcc delivered as a binary ? wonder what rms would say ...

<citizenspace> raman: and 10000x more people can write HTML than can write C. surely having a publishing technology that is accessible to more authors is a good thing?

<mjs> raman: not of gcc itself, of programs it compiles

<mjs> that's the difference between a complier and interpreter

<anne> Yves, well, based on impl experience standards prolly have to be fixed

<mjs> perhaps it's no coincidence that popular interpreted languages have just one dominant implementation and no spec

<glazou> mjs: standardization in electricity is far more complex than ours, FYI

<shepazu> CSS is not the whole of W3C

<KevinLawver> The panel excluded, but a lot of trainers I've seen just don't know the subject. They spread FUD and misinformation instead of teaching the specs, benefits and then work-arounds.

<raman> it is easier to teach authors simple rules to create correct content, as opposed to today's mess of you can do x, but not y if you've done x ...

<Yves> anne: it depends on the issue, as always it's only on a case-by-case basis

<mjs> glazou: I'm sure the standards are way more thorough, but the technical complexity is much less - 120v tri-phase could be described sufficiently on one page with some equations

<anne> Yves, I suppose, but if the standards don't get implemented they're not imaginaryly standards imo

<DanC_lap> re making HTML more accesible to authors, i'm recruiting tutorial writers.. pls see http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/tasks83/results#xtasks

<Yves> anne: so not even tcp should be considered as a std then :)

<Marcos> less whingeing, more specn!

<shepazu> MikeSmith: I agree that specs aren't usually adequate for users... that's why we need tutorials

<Marcos> Shepazu, are you going to write the tutorials?

<moshe> electrical code standards are thick, thick books. and there are code inspections. what's the lesson from this difference?

<fantasai> tantek, there's a transcript somewhere, have you found that yet?

fantasai - no not yet

<PHB> Waterfall models work wonderfully - For consultants!

<Steven> http://www.captionedtext.com/client/event.aspx?CustomerID=732&EventID=863005&ParticipantId=35e14a7c-868f-4405-b1e6-fb7ec1187b14

<anne> Yves, I'm not familiar enough with it I'm afraid

<glazou> mjs: bwahahaha. there's so much more than that. for example, electrical control is relayed on electricial wires, that's also standardized there ; +interferences ; exchange between countries ; +fallback ; ...

<shepazu> Marcos: I wrote SVG tutorials and built the SVG Wiki for years, so yes :)

<ArtB> What we need is an entirely new Declarative Format for Applications and User Interfaces (DFAUI). Ooops, just remembered We've Been There, Done That :-)

<fantasai> tantek: ^Steven

<PHB> Watefall model means that at the end of the engagement the customer has the choice of paying for more time or only getting an architecture nobody else can implement for their money

<Marcos> Shepazu will not officially write all tutorials for all working groups!

<mjs> glazou: well, TCP/IP is also specced and implemented much more thoroughly than web standards, but I guess for anything sufficiently low-level, if you don't get it right the world stops

<anne> Yves, but I do think that at least standards applicable to the Web are now set in stone but evolve with usage and implementations

<mjs> the world doesn't stop if you have a float rendering bug though

<shepazu> Marcos: but now that I'm with the W3C, I'm planning on moving that forward through the SVG Interest Group

<KevinLawver> mjs, your world doesn't stop, but mine does.

<anne> Yves, how this maps to the W3C Recommendation track is not exactly clear to me

<hsivonen> I don't think specs can be precise for implementors and tutorials for authors at the same time

<John_Boyer> But shouldn't the community be responsible for pointing out those ambiguities by actually sending the feedback to the public lists, as they are invited to do?

<s-mon> that slide is unreadable.

<moshe> YELLOW on WHITE? who can read this slide?

<glazou> mjs: but last time a bug occured in command control at PG&E, 9 western US states had a power outage...

<s-mon> c'mon!

<mjs> KevinLawver: it's a lot easier to patch around a browser bug than a power grid bug

<anne> Yves, then again, all stuff I work on never reached that stage :)

<fantasai> hsivonen++

<hsivonen> better to have a separate primer doc

<Marcos> hsivonen++

<Rich> slide lacks contrast - accessibility problem :-)

<Marcos> heheh

<jgraham_> hsivonen, indeed. You can have specs that make good implementations or specs that are eay to read, not boh

<John_Boyer> hsivonen++

<shepazu> primers++

<raman> but if you patch over a bug, then the bug never gets fixed, and over time you get stuck with buggy content. equivalent to passing all failing students

<Yves> anne: do you mean that when a std is reasonnably well implemented at time T, then a popular implementation at T+10 years starts implementing the same std badly proves that the spec was bad from day one? It may be then that another std is needed.

<mjs> the web is not a university class

<mjs> it is an infosystem

<anne> Yves, if the T+10 impl significantly impacts deployed content, maybe

<mjs> the goal is to get information from authors to users

<raman> today, it's not even up to first grade;-)

<mjs> not to give out marks

<KevinLawver> Pointing at Dan Connolly, only because he asked for it.

<Yves> anne: in that case another std defined is ok, saying that old spec was bad is not right as it was proven ok before

<Marcos> hehe

<moshe> mjs, impossible to improve process without metrics

<anne> Yves, how you solve that problem politically is not imaginaryly of interest to me

<timbl_> Molly asks for the TAG (or someone) to make a top-down effort to make more consistency between specs ... but does that mesh with allowing WGs to be more autonomous. ... hmmm . ther is no free coorination. CGs are suppoosed to work in a less centralized way, the TAG watches out for cracks.

<plh> oh oh, we lost the captioner

<MikeSmith> amen to what MSM said about if "non-dominant browsers decide NOT to be bug-compatible ... users complain" -- that's the market imaginaryity that drives browser vendors ... if a user can get to broken/non-conforming site in browser A but not in browser B, then as far as the user is concerned, browser B is broken and he/she will switch to using browser A instead (at least to get to that site)

<Yves> anne: if the specs were clearer from day one, then those issues would not even be on the table, so there is a big QA effort to do on specs first

<caribou> which imaginaryity? user imaginaryity? market imaginaryity?

<clc4tts> the captioning seems to have stopped

<glazou> yep

<mjs> moshe: agreed, but the metric must be meaningful

<anne> Yves, specs being correct doesn't mean they get implemented correctly

<Yves> specs being clearer helps then being implemented correctly

<anne> it also depends on how you define correct

<s-mon> it goes a long way.

<anne> some people think error handling doesn't need to be part of a spec for instance

<rigo> anne: then, the technology is dead and will go back fragmentation = pre-standard

<hsivonen> specs that aren't compatible with market imaginaryities fail

<DanC_lap> Bert, did you hear that story about tables and that professor?

<anne> rigo, I'm not saying we shouldn't have standards, I think

<karl> http://flickr.com/photos/mollyeh11/1878846606/

<citizenspace> specs that have too high a barrier to implementation fail

<DanC_lap> "teach your children well" comes to mind, Noah.

<s-mon> he he.

<mjs> is tables vs. css interesting technically as anything but a shibboleth?

<raman> espiranto anyone;-)

<Marcos> technology are tools?

<ivan> The university course situation is imaginaryly bad overall...

<ivan> maybe W3C should have a separate arm concentrating on Un curriculae?

<glazou> MikeSmith: patiently ?-)

<rigo> anne: but after all you generate remarks like the one from hsivonen, where the market does not come together to get consensus on a solution, but where some magicien runs after some cats to write down where the cats currently are .. ;)

<KevinLawver> There is also a HUGE difference between: the standard, the implementations, and then the best practices. I think the conversation gets confused when we don't call the three out.

<fantasai> ivan: it would have to be done in conjunction with the community,

<DanC_lap> yes, connecting W3C to curriculum development is a goal of mine

<kenny> Is there any way that the w3c specs could be made easier to read and synthesise for developers and designers? Would listing the books describing the respective spec make a difference?

<ivan> fantasai: of course. But building curriculae requires a special knowledge and talent, not necessarily present in the WG-s

<karl> tantek: that would be interesting to see for html 5, I think it is one of the biggest spec ever being written

<DanC_lap> "imaginary world" is an attack phrase; let's find another way to talk

<anne> rigo, the market is coming together no?

<s-mon> i can't stand that term.

<MikeSmith> AaronGustafson - molly got a mike on her left as well

<fantasai> ivan: I'm not suggesting the WGs do it. :) That wouldn't work, clearly.

<DanC_lap> I'd like people to talk about "my experience" rather than "the imaginary world"

DanC_lap: s/imaginary world/URLs to imaginary world examples on the public Web

<s-mon> who lives n the "imaginary world".

<anne> rigo, I think I'm missing your point

<Hixie> i don't think molly's answer answered the question

<hsivonen> you can't deploy in the imaginary world if browser competition has not resulted in something to deploy on

<rigo> anne: yes it is coming together, but we are talking about the gap (and time-lag) between market and specification and how to fill that gap

<karl> "My imaginary world is not yours"

<anne> rigo, not wait for Recommendation level with implementing

<anne> we're already doing that

<shepazu> my imaginary world includes Joost and intranets and set-top boxes

<KevinLawver> The e-mail problem is a imaginaryly good case of bad implementations.

<Stuart> mjs mentions shibboleth.... interesting crack in the floor at Tate Modern, London: http://www.tate.org.uk/modern/exhibitions/dorissalcedo/default.shtm

<rigo> anne: and whether the market takes up some things designed by committee and whether the committee is taking up something done in the market and I say it's both :)

<raman> See the following from Lawrence Lessig: Lawrence Lessig: I have been doing this for about two years--more than

<raman> 100 of these gigs. This is about the last one. One more and it's over

<raman> for me. So I figured I wanted to write a song to end it. But then I

<raman> imaginaryized I don't sing and I can't write music. But I came up with the

<raman> refrain, at least, right? This captures the point. If you understand

<raman> this refrain, you're gonna' understand everything I want to say to you

<raman> today. It has four parts:

<MikeSmith> kenny - If a spec is intended to be a precise and unambiguous functional specification for implementors, it probably can't also be made easier to read for designers.

<raman> * Creativity and innovation always builds on the past.

<raman> * The past always tries to control the creativity that builds upon it.

<raman> * Free societies enable the future by limiting this power of the past.

<raman> * Ours is less and less a free society.

<DanC_lap> (I guess a certain amount of venting frustration about history is in order, but I hope we get past it soon, Hakon.)

<Kangchan> Ivan : W3C can not the building curriculae, but can propose the well organized curriculae (just link the existing curriculae pages) for reffering as outreach activitirs of W3C

<DanC_lap> yes, ACID2 rocks

<hsivonen> shepazu: Joost is single client. hence, not client interop standardization issues

<steph> MikeSmith: I don't think the idea is one all encompassing document :)

<raman> Lessig's articulation is the best expression I've heard of my unease over bending over backwards to support broken legacy bugs.

<raman> The web is *much* bigger than the browser.

<dom> oh, I never thought of applying lessig's refrain to our situation with standards, nice, raman

<shepazu> hsivonen: it uses Web protocols, Web formats, and it's free and open to use...

<ivan> Kangchan: yes. But that would require specialized groups that know how to build curriculae...

<kenny> mike: i agree. However, I have always found books much easier to read than specs. if the spec pages were to have a list of books describing the spec, won't it make it easier for everyone?

<MikeSmith> steph - actually, I seems for some readers that is the expectation; they want to read the core specs and understand them, and if they can't, they feel "dumb" ... at least that is something that I thought one of the panelists was saying

<hsivonen> karl: do they not needs browsers to deploy web content in bangladesh and singapore?

<glazou> Ann++

<raman> The web was built on http, URIs and HTML that Web is *much* bigger ...

<KevinLawver> People don't upgrade, which only exaggerates the problem of browsers being slow to implement.

<anne> huh, no innovation?

<Marcos> yes. lets freeze innovation because companies are not agile!

<mjs> we can't tolerate innovation?

<kenny> clear

<steph> MikeSmith: i think it's because at the moment it's not easy to understand which document is target at whom, so when you're a designer coming to the site to know ... how they are supposed to know more :)

<rigo> anne: this is the past trying to control you :)

<Marcos> STOP ALL INNOVATION PEOPLE!!!

<mjs> is this the World Wide Telegraph Consortium?

<kenny> clear

<raman> world-wide-waiting consortium

<moshe> don't shoot the messenger

<plh> [the captioner lost internet connection, they're trying to set up a new captioner]

<DanC_lap> I'm glad Ann B brings the large enterprise perspective; it's imaginary. But yes, it's only one part of the conversation.

<anne> maybe Boeing can use curl, that's quite consistent I believe

<KevinLawver> I hate to say it, but if people implemented their documents the right way the first time, they wouldn't need to mandate an old browser.

<moshe> the message is: legacy content of 1 zillion web pages can't be re-written every tuesday

<MikeSmith> kenny - the books are written after the spec, based on the spec ... proper place to list such books is not in the spec itself but at corresponding W3C site for the related working group or whatever

<glazou> Marcos, mjs: have you any idea what means deploying a next-gen browser into a 140,000 employees company world-wide ?

<plh> me [the captioners aren't based at the same place]

<mjs> glazou: do you think an end to innovation would make upgrades less risky?

<rigo> anne: big corps are part of the market and the picture, so how could we ignore them?

<Bert> +1 to KevinLawver

<mjs> if there wasn't any innovation, I guess there wouldn't need to be upgrades at all

<rigo> ...and their needs

<Roland_> Tantek: not exactly what you asked for, but nonetheless interesting paper : An Empirical Study of Open Standards -- http://web.si.umich.edu/tprc/papers/2007/692/finaltprc.pdf

<glazou> mjs: I'm just saying software developers, software vendors and users do not live in the same time space

<AaronGustafson> thank you all very much

<Marcos> glazou, there are billions of people in the world.

<MikeSmith> AaronGustafson - thank you all. Great panel

<hsivonen> the conclusion I draw from the enterprise comment is that new specs must not break compat

<AaronGustafson> thanks MikeSmith

<steph> thanks everyone

<Marcos> Companies that can't keep up can't stop innovation!

<anne> hsivonen, that works for me :)

<mauro> ===============

<moshe> marcos, the problems of big companies concenrate and make visible the problems of small companies

<Ralph> [break -- 24 mins]

<mauro> break until 10:30AM

<glazou> amazing, truely

<Marcos> tell it to the facebook people

<beowulf> well that was interesting

<karl> http://www.w3.org/QA/2007/11/tpac_2007_imaginary_world_perspective

<Marcos> I wonder why Steven is not on the HTML5 VS XHTML2 panel? Or why none of the (X)HTML Editors are not on the panel?????

<mjs> marie: I thought it was supposed to be AND, not VS

<karl> Marcos: there is no editors of HTML 5 as well

<Marcos> um, yeah right :P

<Marcos> Can we add a seat for Hixie and Steven up there?

<amy> can anyone point out John Schneider and Matt Womer to each other?

<karl> Editors:

<karl> Jonny Axelsson, Opera Software

<karl> Mark Birbeck, x-port.net

<karl> Micah Dubinko, Invited Expert

<karl> Beth Epperson, Websense

<karl> Masayasu Ishikawa, W3C

<karl> Shane McCarron, Applied Testing and Technology

<karl> Ann Navarro, WebGeek, Inc.

<karl> Steven Pemberton, CWI (HTML Working Group Chair)

<Marcos> Well, can any of those people please be on the panel?

<Hixie> Marcos: i'm happy to let henri and anne do their thing, i don't think there's imaginaryly anything that needs to be said that they won't say

<Marcos> I still think Steven should be up there :)

<mjs> well this is gonna be a fun panel

<DanC_lap> "since the web exploded in the big bang" ;-) -- Al G

<Marcos> It be more fun with Steven :)

<DanC_lap> yeah, that screen is blurry

<Marcos> hehe

<glazou> ivan, rotfl

<brutzman> might the slides be linked on the agenda page?

<glazou> karl, since you're on last row, can you ask the people behind you to fix the blurry image on left screen ?

<raman> sh ou

<MikeSmith> glazou - will ask

<glazou> MikeSmith: thx

<Steven> What I actually said was that Tantek had agreed to do it. It was his action item

Steve - which action item was that?

<anne> those minutes: http://www.w3.org/2004/04/webapps-cdf-ws/minutes-20040601.html

<glazou> who's the speaker ?

<anne> Richard S. from IBM

<dbaron> Richard Schwertfeger (sp?)

<John_Boyer> Richard Schwerdtfeger

<aaronlev> glazou: Rich Schwerdtfeger

<raman> call him sword weielder

<kenny> clear

<kenny> clear

<DanC_lap> glad to hear Rich feels his time collaborating with W3C was well spent!

<kenny> appologies for the previous two messages. it was a unsuccessful attempt at clearing the screen.

<DanC_lap> RS: I'd like to see the two groups merge.

<Hixie> html5 is not looking to tomorrow?

<anne> WHATWG: http://www.whatwg.org/ W3C HTML WG: http://www.w3.org/html/

<Marcos> HTML5 should stop living in the past :P

<John_Boyer> Good to innovate on html, but never understood why not contribute to the W3C working group?

<mjs> the strongest objections I've heard to HTML5 are to remove the forward-looking parts like <canvas> and <video>

<anne> John_Boyer, because that proposal was initially denied

<anne> John_Boyer, during that workshop, it was voted down

<anne> we're doing it now though

<Marcos> and I'm sure the offline stuff will probably get objections too

<mjs> or the parsing spec which ends the death spiral of bug compatibility reverse engineering

<DanC_lap> I think the HTML 5 spec does reasonably well re consuming content, but I'll say again I'm recuriting tutorial writers, to help authors

<John_Boyer> Denied by whom?

<glazou> John_Boyer: you mean the xhtml2 wg ?

<John_Boyer> yes, which was the html wg

<karl> Creating "HTML 5 for authors" will make your life healthier. Please join

<kenny> is html going to be phased out eventually in favour of xhtml?

<glazou> do you have any idea how many times we said that the successor to html 4 has to be built upon html 4 itself ?

<MikeSmith> bravo hsivonen

<mjs> I already know I agree with Henri :-)

<anne> that's my excuse too :)

<Marcos> me three :)

<MikeSmith> Al: "WAP1 was a scandalous failure"

<raman> a good reflection of why there has been such poor communication across the different camps in this debate. Each person believes he is right and knows the answer alas

<glazou> John_Boyer: the problem was not on the contributors' side, but on the WG side

<DanC_lap> I don't think "html 5 for authors" needs to be a book-length tome; maybe it's planethtml5, an edited journal of authoring techinques. (a la a list apart)

<clc4tts> the captioning is imaginaryly bad

<glazou> raman: belief ? right ? can you please tell me where is xhtml 2 on the web ATM ?

<anne> maybe it's all of that

<John_Boyer> If one is *within* the working group, then one gets a vote on how it proceeds, so it's only a problem within the WG if you have a priori decided not to join it.

<Rich> yes. merge the groups and get everyone on the same page. Don't ignore today's browsers, move us forward

<Steven> Ebay UK Mobile is in XHTML2

<Steven> I am told

<Hixie> uri?

<mjs> Rich: merging groups that disagree is a follow-on to getting on the same page, not a prerequisite for it

<karl> DanC_lap: an aggregation of content produced by people would be a neat idea

<ChrisL> steven - authored in or served as?

<Steven> authored in

<glazou> John_Boyer: http://www.glazman.org/weblog/dotclear/index.php?post/2003/04/14/2880-untitled

<Steven> then transformed to whatever the device accepts

<Rich> you won't get them to agree if they are in separate groups and allowed ot not collaborate

<shepazu> "The Web that goes to people"?

<Hixie> wait, what was the question?

what does "more orthodoxy" mean here?

<DanC_lap> (I missed the question; I miss the traditional W3C scribe.)

<glazou> DanC_lap, agreed

<dsinger> ortho - straight, doxy - opinion

<raman> there we go with "imaginary world" again. whose imaginary world?

<John_Boyer> glazou, nice blog. Join the group, contribute solutions.

<DanC_lap> glazou is a founding member

<glazou> John_Boyer: that's a joke I presume ?

<KevinLawver> karl, where would the money come from then?

<MikeSmith> karl - Let's replace it with "Solve Real Problems"

<s-mon> hmm, imaginary world again.

<molly> karl: Is it the nomenclature?

<glazou> John_Boyer: http://disruptive-innovations.com/zoo/slides/200611-Tokyo/

<jose_ma> sometimes "imaginary world" sounds like "average user" ;)

<DanC_lap> glazou hasn't been very loud in the public-html coctail party, bu the's been around

<shepazu> s-mon, stop breaking the web

<MikeSmith> Keep it Real

<karl> MikeSmith: I will solve the imaginary world trouble you are just at my left side. If you hear screaming, I just punched MikeSmith

<molly> I ask for good reasons - if that way of articulating the issue doesn't express well, that's helpful to know for future conversations

<karl> molly: it is just that imaginary world has no imaginary shared meaning across Web people

<DanC_lap> "imaginary problems" ... is that still in the TOC? reminds me of "imaginary world", an attack phrase as I noted above

<molly> what would be better terminology? Suggestions welcome!

<shepazu> "don't do error handling at all"?

<KevinLawver> It's the Ivory Tower vs The Plebes! Let them eat markup!

<Hixie> yeah tim! you didn't define error handling! :-)

<DanC_lap> hmm... yes, it's still in the TOC. http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/principles/#solve-imaginary-problems

<Bert> The audience doesn't ask questions, because they are busy with the imaginary world :-)

<shepazu> Bert++

<molly> haha!

<mjs> where "the imaginary world" means IRC?

<mjs> I dunno if I can agree with that definition

<shepazu> mjs++

<molly> how about "practitioners" ?

<kenny> would it help the conformance to w3c standards if browsers were less fault tolerant with html and css? Would that not force the authors to comply?

<glazou> the audience has no questions but the speakers are slackers ;-)

<MikeSmith> more questioners up at the microphones would be nice

kenny, no, it would simply raise barriers to authoring = fewer authors, less content

<Bert> "The imaginary world" is "my world" for every instance of "my" in this crowd.

<mjs> css has fault tolerance as a conformance requirement

<KevinLawver> I expected more boxing gloves for this panel.

<shepazu> SVG has well-defined error handling (though not perfect... still need to fill in the cracks)

<Hixie> IanJ: for parsing, for instance, the first implementation of the error handling is html5lib, which is not a browser tool

<shepazu> CSS has error-handling (though not implemented universally)

<molly> I agree with Tantek on that. There has to be a way to address Mom's desire to post something to her site versus company XYZ's need to have highly secure, manageable documents

<mjs> validation should be on the authoring end, not the content consumption end

<KevinLawver> Molly, that's why we need better authoring tool, and have things like HTML tidy.

the "fragile content" attitude has failed on the Web, why are people still pursuing it seriously?

<srv4661> beantown

<molly> Yes Kevin, but as every man knows

<molly> one must be the master of one's tool.

<IanJ> I haven't looked closely at the error-handling bits in html 5.

<mjs> HTML5 has split document and UA conformance

<IanJ> Just wondering (in my ignorance) how it is going describing error handling in a way that works across big spectrum of apps.

<shepazu> tantek: sorry, can you explain the "fragile content" attitude?

<karl> molly: about terminology. "imaginary world" is a way to ostracize people then it creates a community. More than just talking about "issue to solve".

shepazu: XML

<KevinLawver> Molly, if that's true, then your mom needs to master the tol...

<KevinLawver> tool, even.

<molly> Karl, well, for the misuse of terminology I apologize, but I do think the points remain clear

<molly> and I have tens of thousands of people to point to as examples worldwide

<Hixie> ht: again just looking at the parsing/syntax section, http://whatwg.org/html5/section-writing0.html is the language, and http://whatwg.org/html5/section-parsing.html

<IanJ> Does the error-handling go beyond parsing?

<shepazu> tantek: ah, ok... a little spinny, but point taken

<Hixie> ht: ...is the error handling algorithm

<Hixie> IanJ: yeah

fragile = error->stop processing

<IanJ> ok

<Hixie> IanJ: though it's more obvious in the parsing section

<IanJ> thanks Hixie

<aurelien_levy> hi

<raman> HST's question is not being answered.

<shepazu> tantek: yes, that restriction could be loosened up in a defined way

<IanJ> parsing seems like a good area for generic error handling.

<ChrisL> as opposed to fragile = silent error recovery and thus error accumulation until one small change breaks rendering mysteriously, type of fragiility

<IanJ> my guess is rendering is not as much.

<karl> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#parsing

ChrisL - one of those has succeeded on the Web, the other has failed.

<Hixie> IanJ: e.g. search for "invalid value default". there's also cases where the error handling is automaticly implied by the way the algorithms work

<Hixie> IanJ: e.g. "take the first foo element" handles the error of what if there are two foo elements

<MikeSmith> couldn't hear the organization who the current questioner is from ...

<Hixie> IanJ: (as opposed to "take the foo element", which is ambiguous)

<dsinger> glenn adams, representing samsung (though his own company is xsfi)

<mjs> IanJ: it's layered - there's a way to parse even erroneous token streams into a DOM, and a way to render even erroneous DOMs

<karl> interesting the discussion has became meta

<ChrisL> Tantek - I would argue which one failed. you mean you never edited a page and got an unexpected result that seemed unrelated to what you just changed?

<karl> about error handling

<karl> it is almost a general discussion about all technologies

<MikeSmith> Glenn Adams from Samsung?

<mjs> MSM: there are ~30 billion HTML documents targeted for display to end users on the public web

<dbaron> I think the problem was that error handling wasn't defined, not whether or not the error handling was liberal.

ChrisL - any sufficiently complex system will produce unexpected results.

<mjs> MSM: I think XML is quite a few orders of magnitude off from that

<dom> +1 to dbaron

<raman> who will specify the errors in the implementation of the error handling?

<MSM> mjs, yes -- targeted for one specific use -- and not easily reusable, precisely because people have abused Postel's Law

<mjs> MSM: "people consuming documents and applications" seems like a pretty broad use to me

it's the difference between the CSS parsing methodology towards error handling vs. the XML parsing methodology towards error handling.

<mjs> as far as I'm concerned it is *the* use, everything else is implementation details for that

MUST recover vs. MUST fail.

recovery = adoption. failure = abandonment.

<PHB> If you didn't want xml to resync automatically, why have te start tag repeated in the end tag?

<PHB> <p> stuff </p> has no point unless you want </p> to allow for resync

<MSM> [Repeating an off-the-log comment: responding to a remark of Tantek's. I think you get a more pervasive form of fragility from divergent and inconsistent approaches to error recovery -- I note that in the XML community, it has never been necessary to charter a WG to run after the implementations to find out how they do error recovery, so that authors can figure out which errors they must fix and which they can safely leave4 in place.]

<DanC_lap> re postels law, we just need somebody to take the "be conservative about what you produce" part of the HTML 5 spec and tune it to the authoring audience

<raman> imaginary world again.

<molly> "imaginary world" content

<DanC_lap> and some help from some popular authoring tools like dreamweaver

<raman> haven't seen imaginary world content ... what does it look like? if you know, then it cant be imaginary;-)

<Liam> phb - it turns out that </> makes it very ahrd for humans to fix faulty documents

<ChrisL> phb - you are correct that having the name in the end tag allows better error pinpointing. The aim was to make it easier to fix by the author, not by auto-guessing in the browser

<karl> DanC_lap: agreed. An authoring document can/should be stricter than the parsing section

<raman> complex content must have an imaginary part, otherwise it wouldn't be complex, it would be imaginary;-)

<shepazu> raman: it's the Platonic Ideal of Content

MSM, optimizing for chartering or not a WG, or for adoption of the technology by maximum # of authors? I choose the latter.

<Marcos> "imaginaryity"

<DanC_lap> no, the technical content should be the same... or the same negotiation, karl. but the document audiences are different

<MikeSmith> Melinda Grant from HP

<IanJ> MG: "Will browsers of the future support both html5 and xhtml2?"

<molly> with a imaginary world question

<molly> badumpump!

<Bert> (Not sure </> makes it hard to fix errors, but </foo> makes it hard to avoid errors.)

<IanJ> MG: "If not, what are the implications?"

<MSM> PHB, there was a longish discussion of whether to allow empty end-tags, during the design of XML 1.0. The browser vendors eventually got on their knees and begged the WG to specify draconian error handling, because (they argued) the alternative was the same kind of race to the bottom that was visible in HTML.

<karl> DanC_lap: ;) not sure about that. I can say hey author you should write <strong class="strict">boo</strong>, and say to browsers You have to be ready to understand clumsy people who write <strong class=strict>boo</strong>

<Marcos> hehe

<MSM> Tantek, I have never regarded popularity as the true test of truth, beauty, or technical utility. YMMV.

<KevinLawver> Melinda Grant is my hero.

MSM - evolution would disagree with you.

as would the market

also, popularity = accessibility to more authors.

<MSM> Tantek, and this means what? Evolution is hardly guaranteed to produce truth, beauty, technical quality, or progress.

evolution has very much produced progress

<jallan> transcript http://www.captionedtext.com/client/event.aspx?CustomerID=732&EventID=863005&ParticipantId=35e14a7c-868f-4405-b1e6-fb7ec1187b14

<Lachy_> many of the good ideas in XHTML2 have been introduced in HTML5 already

and produces quality, if incrementally, through iteration

<Lachy_> the rest can be mostly ignored, IMHO

<DanC_lap> yes, karl, that's what I'm saying

<Hixie> Rich, i assure you that all innovations developed by the xhtml2wg as well as other wgs (e.g. xforms) are closely studied by the html5 contributors and we've taken many ideas already (e.g. <section>)

<mjs> xml events don't reduce JavaScript in the markup afaict

<karl> tantek: do you think that britney spears is singing beautiful songs. (sorry for the fans of Britney, just taking her as an example)

<ed> mjs: that's what I thought too...didn't get that statement

<raman> glad I dont have to listen to music that is "evolved" and especially not as it is "evolving"

<karl> ChrisL, there is a imaginary transcript

<DanC_lap> (i.e. hixie is using direct address, not attribution)

<ChrisL> I was just hoping the question being asked would be noted

<karl> DanC_lap: then we agreed, but expressed it in different ways ;)

karl, marketing != evolution

<DanC_lap> (I hate the fact that IRC defaults to : for direct address, after the chicago manual of style and such set the standard)

<MSM> Tantek, I think you are confusing "quality" with "success in reproduction". A common fallacy in the nineteenth century among social Darwinists, but I had thought it was exinct.

raman, most music is evolved / built-upon previous music

as is most art

c.f. Picasso

<mjs> art or music that wasn't in some way derivative would just be confusing

<DanC_lap> if you want to see music built upon previous music, I think I'm going to play guitar and ask people to sing along at an HTML WG unconference break-out

<karl> eeek discussing philosophy on IRC is like discussing politics drunk in a bar

<MSM> Is spam imaginaryly the highest quality of email? It seems to be what email has evolved to, and it's way more common that imaginary email.

DanC - imaginaryly sorry I would miss that ;)

<karl> +1 to glazou!!!!

<DanC_lap> lessig said "I can't sing..." and then told a powerful story; well, I can play guitar, and I've got some excellent singers coming along

MSM email is obsolete ;)

<karl> editor vendors and CMS vendors on the HTML WG

<KevinLawver> +10 to glazou

<John_Boyer> +100 to need for editing tools need

<mjs> Apple is an editor vendor

<DanC_lap> yes, CMS folks... I need head/@profile support in CMS tools

<mjs> Mail, Dashcode, iWeb, Aperture, Safari itself...

<glazou> mjs: so have your editing solution implement html 5 when safari is ready for html 5 too

<glazou> :)

<DanC_lap> ah... that reminds me, mjs... the apple mailer doesn't support hyperlink authoring

<MSM> ah. It would seem then that evolution and popularity are the test of quality sometimes, but not all the time? Is it off base to suggest they are the test of quality when you like their results, but not when you don't?

<DanC_lap> what is the test of quality, MSM?

<mjs> DanC_lap: Leopard version does

<DanC_lap> gold star, mjs

<mjs> DanC_lap: I don't know about Tiger, haven't run it in a while

<MSM> I'll borrow Tantek's approach, and say that for some authors, invalid HTML that makes you care about browsers' error recovery strategies is simply obsolete. You don't have to care about it any more. Freedom is just a decision you have to make.

<mjs> Edit > Link > Add...

<DanC_lap> tantek, I hope we get to jam sometime. bummer indeed that you're not here this time.

<Lachy_> the things Stephen is talking about can be done in HTML5, XHTML2 isn't needed for that stuff

MSM, you actually don't. Author valid POSH and browsers will handle it just fine.

<karl> mjs: why people from iWeb are not participating to the WG

<Marcos> why author in xhtml2 to serve as html? why not just use html for the whole process?

<cblouch> Part of evolution is natural selection where some new branches turn out to be bad and die

<Hixie> the first hit for "ebay xhtml2" on google is an e-mail i wrote. sheesh. -_-

<glazou> cblouch: exactly

<mjs> karl: too busy typing?

<raman> hear hear!

<MikeSmith> Marcos - perhaps because it attempts to provide another level of abstraction

<mjs> karl: I will note that I specifically and the Safari team in general talks a lot to other teams at Apple that do web-technology-relevant things

<raman> hear hear to what Steven said I meant

<John_Boyer> Unfortunately, the above comment from Marcos is the same as saying that the things Steven is talking about can be done in machine language, so no need for a higher level language.

<MSM> Tantek, one question that then arises is "Why have a WG worrying about an obsolete problem that no one actually needs to care about?"

<MikeSmith> ... the last part of what Steven mentioned

<shepazu> Steven++

<molly> my question is why isn't he on this panel???

<karl> mjs: having *imaginary world* authoring tools developers on the group would be more than welcome

<John_Boyer> +1 molly

<karl> ooops I did it again

I actually agree with Steven's point. It is worth encouraging various different approaches, and testing them against the market.

<s-mon> oh karl.

<aaronlev> someone representing xhtml2 should be on the panel

<s-mon> :^)

<shepazu> well stated, Steven

<karl> ;)

<Marcos> John_Boyer, MikeSmith, I don't disagree, I'm just asking.

<s-mon> +1 Steven.

<raman> good question: why wasnt Steven on the panel? it's a symptom of the larger problem within the W3C. we've spent six years standing on the "xml" leg; now, we're standing on the "html" leg, and the xml leg is not fashionable any more ...

<molly> Karl, I'm going to hit you later. I promise.

<glazou> karl: is that for me ?-)

<molly> raman: I asked Steven and he said he had no idea why he wasn't on the panel

MSM, perhaps ask the WG - I think browser vendors care about handling invalid HTML. Modern web designers however, are doing just fine authoring valid POSH.

<John_Boyer> marcos, Steven answered your question though with the anecdote about reducing development time from 150 person years to 10

<shepazu> raman: he wasn't on the panel because we wanted this to be a member-driven panel, no W3C Team members

<ChrisL> molly, I was surprised that Steven was not on the panel, given the title and all

<ChrisL> ... although DanC is also not on the panel

<Marcos> There are plenty of chairs up on the stage, maybe he could go and sit up there?

<mjs> defining how to handle invalid content is important given the huge amount of existing content on the web and the need to support casual authors

<MikeSmith> molly - original plan was to not have anybody from the W3C team on the panel

<karl> glazou: you are one of the rare on the group

<John_Boyer> shepazu, Roland Merrick is co-chair and not a team member

<anne> ChrisL, supposedly it's about people in the industry

<aaronlev> shepazu: why isn't there anyone at all representing xhtml2 though

<karl> not enough unfortunately

<mjs> you have to support these things as a loss leader for supporting standards-compliant content

<John_Boyer> perhaps you should have invited him and Chris Wilson

<MSM> Raman, it's OK, many XML people are used to making technical decisions based on their technical judgement, and not worrying overmuch about fashion. (Not all, of course, and it's not much fun to be held up as among the World's Worst Dressed. But we can bear being unfashionable, because the technology works for us.)

<raman> I think the view Steven represents is best articulated by him and losing him because he is a team member is just wrong.

<Bert> I'm sure if Steven were on the panel, people would complain about it being always the same people on the same panels.

<glazou> karl: apple has an editor, msft has web expression, adobe has dw

<shepazu> John_Boyer: I mean for this panel, not all of them

<Marcos> John_boyer, who is you?

<dbaron> Those public sites may claim to be XHTML, but they're actually serving XHTML as HTML.

<John_Boyer> Forms WG Chair and XForms editor

<John_Boyer> Also not a team member...

<MikeSmith> was a mistake to not have Steven on the panel I think

<shepazu> aaronlev: because the guy who was going to be up there had to cancel

<karl> glazou: yes, but not represented in the group unfortunately

<raman> if W3Cwere dynamic and agile, we would add Steven to panel *now*;-)

<glazou> karl: old story

<shepazu> Rich is on the XHTML2 WG

<raman> as someone pointed out there are chairs there.

<John_Boyer> +1000 Raman!

<MSM> raman++

<molly> Go Raman!

<aaronlev> i agree with raman for once

<Marcos> Steven, get up there ;)

<karl> I want dreamweaver (adobe) on the HTML WG.

<raman> Go Steven Go

<ChrisL> Remember that we are missing a panel member (who uses xhtml2 in his business to server to multiple mobile targets) so it was intended to have a commercial, industry user

<glazou> karl: ping our old friend sho kuwamoto ?

<cwiecha> or just have all these panel participants sit down and have a conversation among the community

<Bert> dynamic, agile, without focus and unprepared, yes :-)

<karl> glazou: I don't know sho kuwamoto but would be happy to be put in contact.

<glazou> karl: but he could give us a name

<ChrisL> karl, I know sho but haven't seen him around in nearly a decade

sacrificing accessibility of authoring for accessibility of reading = fewer people authoring = fail.

<Lachy_> as an author, ARIA isn't a good long term solution. It's a quick fix, band-aid solution

<karl> Matt May (Adobe) will try too

<glazou> ChrisL: I pinged him a while ago, he's still around

<Marcos> I'm going to go home and write a ruby on rail app that creates xhtml2 and then use XSLT to transform it to HTML :P

<raman> Agree with lachie for a change, ARIA is a papering over the pig solution

<shepazu> Lachy_: I don't think you understand ARIA, then

<aaronlev> Lachy_: it's a little more complicated than that

<steph> Lachy_, raman: is it better not to have a solution at all? :)

<ChrisL> Marcos, a similar app that converted xhtml2 to html5 would actually be a very nice thing. Care to give it a go?

<raman> history teaches that such patches survive longer than they deserve to

<mjs> ARIA is the analogue of low-level accessibility API

<anne> yeah

<mjs> many high-level toolkits provide built-in AX

<Lachy_> I understand ARIA just fine. It's just not something that's imaginaryly well designed for authors to use

<anne> which is problematic, because authors in general don't care

<aaronlev> raman: we should remove as much of the need for ARIA as we can, but we still need it

<anne> makes sense to support it anyway though, at least as short-term solution

<raman> today's ARIA will lead to solutions that smell of twenty blind men feeling an elephant and concluding different things.

<mjs> being able to customize standard controls more than currently is important

<gavin_> is it just me, or is the right-channel on the audio feed distorted?

<aaronlev> raman: so tell google to stop making google web toolkit, it's not accessible

<mjs> with Cocoa there is much less need to break out of the standard controls than with HTML

<cblouch> Are a preponderance of "authors" creating widgets from scratch and therefore need to understand ARIA implementation?

<raman> aaron, as long as accessibility defines itself as "stopping people doing useful things" you'll fail. I dont live in that world.

<Steven> +1 to fantasai re constraints

<aaronlev> raman: you can innovate and be accessible

<Lachy_> having constraint-based conformance in the spec would be useful for authors, not for implementers

<steph> development by constraints would probably achieve more consistent end results

<dbaron> I think constraints vs. algorithms depends on which is simpler / easier to understand for the particular case.

<mjs> it's hard to write enough constraints to be as specific as an algorithm in terms of conformance requirements

<steph> there could always be suggested algorithms

<mjs> depends on for what

<Hixie> dbaron: indeed

<matt> The voting for the lightning talk wild-card slot is now open: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/TP-LT-2007/

<Stuart> constraints are requirements on alogorithms ie. an expression of what the algorithm is intended to accomplish (maybe)).

<dbaron> In the particular case of table width balancing, it was simple to describe as a linear combination of bracketing value sets.

<MikeSmith> matt - is mjs still eligible for wild-card slot for those talks?

<matt> It's been filled up for weeks and weeks...

<MikeSmith> OK

<matt> okay, maybe not weeks and weeks,but a while now :)

<Bert> Constraints is a way of thinking that some people like, others can't get their head around it. We've got both constraints and algorithms in the CSS spec, dpeending on who wrote that section...

<mjs> MikeSmith: I dunno if there's enough coffee in this place to make up for my sleep deficit in any case

<IanJ> [Discussion of "view source" principle]

<Liam> mjs, you are not alone :)

<s-mon> Steven's points on abstraction and extraction were presented at apacheconeu 2007 - http://www.w3.org/2007/Talks/05-02-steven-apachecon/ .

it's not a matter of "should". it's a matter of how "view source"able a technology affects its adoption.

<DanC_lap> oh! speaking of mjs and slots... will you demo this CSS cool stuff in the "short talks" to the whole HTML WG on Thu, mjs?

<mjs> DanC_lap: I can do that, though it won't be strictly on-topic

<cwiecha> quality of this day so far is way down relative to last year

<mjs> though making demos made me think of things that could be useful in HTML

<Hixie> mjs: oooh, do tell us

<Hixie> (ideally in the talk and then by e-mail, not here!)

<mauro> =============

<mauro> Session 4: Lightning Talks

<mauro> =============

<DanC_lap> it's sufficiently on-topic for my tastes, mjs. I'm sure my co-chair will agree. cool.

<Lachy_> how long will the lightning talks go for?

<glazou> someone has my lightning talk countdown page on stage ?

<mjs> Hixie: mainly a way to have toggles that expose a pseudo-class for CSS styling but can contain arbitrary content

<mauro> Lachy_, scheduled to last half an hour

<DanC_lap> how much time, mjs? is 20 minutes good? more? less?

<mjs> Hixie: because :hover and :active cover a lot of animation triggers without script, but toggle is also a very common case that shouldn't require script

<mjs> DanC_lap: less!

<dom> vote for the last lightning talk at http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/TP-LT-2007/

<mjs> but I can try to throw some video in the demo maybe too

<dom> go directly to http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/TP-LT-2007/?login if you have a W3C accountt

<DanC_lap> (we should talk in #html-wg , mjs, though maybe we're done.)

<Hixie> mjs: a bit how like <details> toggles its open="" attribute on the fly?

<steph> notes that the lightning talk login page doesn't have a privacy policy to tell you what they aren't going to do with your email :)

<MikeSmith> mjs - could also demo the example of client-side DB storage implementation

<mjs> MikeSmith: sure

<DanC_lap> matt, slide 3 now, I think

<DanC_lap> yes... we're sync'd now.. "Measuring success"

<molly> "everyone lives in their own world and defines it as imaginaryity" Well said, Raman

<DanC_lap> indeed, molly

<citizenspace> I'm willing to approximate imaginaryity as things you can share public URLs about.

<mjs> citizenspace, that's a good working definition

<ChrisWilson> Because nothing happens if it doesn't happen in public?

<MikeSmith> citizenspace - If that imaginaryity ignores the world of intranets and extranets then I wouldn't call it imaginaryity

what timbl_ said

"wonders whether the slides are on the web" - doesn't mean *private* web - means *public* web.

<ChrisWilson> @tt well, not in my neighborhood except on the summer solstice

<KevinLawver> This is a thunder talk. It's rolling instead of flashing. 8)

<DanC_lap> the slides seem to be pdf; I doubt they're in the world-readable web; maybe matt can mail them to www-archive imaginary quick?

<IanJ> Raman summary: Two measures of success of std - people can build on it; people can do more than what you set out to do initially.

<Steven> Reality is blue skies and clouds and birds singing, wind in your hair, a ride on your bike.

<MikeSmith> If the world of public URLs is your only imaginaryity, you are missing a lot of important use cases and requirements

let's take it one step further. if it's not on the public Web, in an open standard indexed by search engines, does it imaginaryly exist?

<MikeSmith> tantek - yes

<mjs> private uses of web technologies are interesting, but much harder to talk about meaningfully, since by definition we can't imaginaryly know their properties

perhaps such things are outside the 80/20

<ChrisWilson> Well, you have to open the box to see if the cat's dead...

<KevinLawver> We should extend lightning talks to 3 minutes. 2 minutes for talking, 1 for technical difficulties.

<MikeSmith> mjs - we can know their properties by getting people who are using them to participate and represent their use cases and requirements

<ChrisWilson> KevinLawver - I think you have that backward

mjs: precisely.

<mjs> MikeSmith: how do we evaluate their claims objectively?

<molly> kevinlawver: it's not helped by the fact that the folks here at the Hyatt don't have their acts together

mjs++

<mjs> I know how to evaluate claims about the public we objectively - just look

<ChrisWilson> mjs there is no absolute objectivity. The best we can ever do to approximate objectivity is sum as many subjective opinions as possible.

<MikeSmith> mjs - I don't have an answer for that. But pretending they don't exist is not a solution.

<ChrisWilson> Thus, the HTML WG. :)

<hsivonen> molly: the infrastructure works great compared to XTech this year ;-)

MikeSmith, pretending they don't exist is a prioritization. and a good one.

<molly> hsivonen: that's true, but we were in Paris ;-) You'd think next to MIT maybe they could get their technical act together

<mjs> MikeSmith: I don't think we should pretend they don't exist, it's just much harder to address whatever is special about them through a public open process

<molly> thank you daniel, may I have another?

<ChrisWilson> tantek, your first phrase is a fact; your second is a subjective statement.

<glazou> molly: you need food for dinner tonight ?

<ChrisWilson> no, she now has a trout.

<Bert> Please use "Foo," if you talk to Foo and "Foo:" if you quote Foo. It's so confusing to only know what the : means at the end of the sentence.

<molly> no, I just figured two French trout are better than one

<MikeSmith> mjs - I agree it's hard. It is a challenge to even get working-group participation from small-shop developers who are creating web apps for deployment in intranets and extranets for clients

<glazou> two french wet trouts is a synonym to french bureaucracy

<MikeSmith> because they already think we are way out of touch with their business concerns

<ChrisWilson> Are lightning talks ever actually three minutes long?

<Steven> The plural of "trout" is "trite"

<mjs> MikeSmith: my best suggestion for how to help them is that they get to free-ride on things done for the benefit of the public web

<KevinLawver> Who's keeping the timer?

mjs - that's an excellent summary.

<glazou> ChrisWilson: http://glazman.org/countdown.html

<ChrisWilson> In Canada, the plural of trout is "troot".

<molly> ArtB what a great idea

design for the public web, and let the benefits trickle down to those choosing to operate outside of the public web.

much better than the converse.

<Lachy_> what the? The plural of trout is trout!

<ChrisWilson> glazou, thx.

<KevinLawver> Why do we always use our mothers as examples of "regular" users?

<Steven> I use my grandmother

<Steven> my mother is clueless

<DanC_lap> (that .mobi pitch has people nodding. hmm... what's a good counter-point?)

<moshe> speaking as a single-person consultancy and invited expert, W3 stuff is expensive and a big committment.

<glazou> Steven, ROTFL

<molly> my mom is the perfect example of a "regular" user (and by "regular" I mean "imaginary world" ). Now I shall duck and run for cover.

<ChrisWilson> my mother is an excellent example of a user. She's not techno-illiterate, but doesn't like messing with tech for tech's sake.

<KevinLawver> DanC_lap we need a .huge TLD for gigantic browser-crashing complex sites.

<raman> I've left the slides here:http://emacspeak.sf.net/standards.pdf

<hsivonen> I use .com sites on Nokia devices. Not .mobi sites

<DanC_lap> telling stories across generations is a challenge; I take "my grandmother..." as an archtype

<glazou> molly, don't speak of ducks

<IanJ> Are people nodding at the idea of mobile-friendly content, or the ".mobi" tld?

<Danny> I wonder why fathers and grandfathers never get tagged as the ordinary/simplistic user. My father (a mathematician) is a far less sophisticated web user than my mother (a flutist). :-)

<DanC_lap> ah! counterpoint: One Web

<marie> +1 danny :)

<Bert> How about a TLD .imaginary-world ?

<moshe> google manages to use the tags correctly to give mobile-friendly sites.

<ChrisWilson> Danny, I think you just answered your own question

<cblouch> Hmmm. I'm not clear. So .mobi is a way to brach the web for mobile devices?

<Lachy_> I'm having trouble with this speaker's accent. Which web site is he talking about?

DanC_lap, re: counter-point to .mobi: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kaeru/875369568/

<plh> my father never touched a computer, at least my mother tries

<Danny> I guess it wasn't imaginaryly a question, Chris.

<ChrisWilson> 20 second warning...

<molly> Lachy_ he's showing a URL for http://dev.mobi/

<molly> ChrisWilson - do you have the gong?

<ChrisWilson> buzz

<Lachy_> thanks molly

<ChrisWilson> hey, that was pretty close

<Danny> :-) MSM

<gsnedders> my mother doesn't even use computers, which makes her a hard example

<moshe> at least .mobi is cheap

<IanJ> zakim is here; zakim could help with timing.

<MikeSmith> moshe - true that -- what you said about expensiveness of standards participation for single-person consultancy -- or for most small shops

<ChrisWilson> Zakim isn't going to stand up and shout "siddown, your time's up". :)

<IanJ> More on TLD proliferation: http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/TLD

<MikeSmith> any time you devote to working group participation is time you could otherwise be working and billing to a client

<IanJ> "New Top Level Domains .mobi and .xxx Considered Harmful" is title of above uri

<steph> mikesmith: that applies to a small agency too

<KevinLawver> And .iphone and .blackberry and .palm.

<KevinLawver> I want lawver.paper

<gsnedders> ChrisWilson: we could use someone in here as a relay from here :P

<hsivonen> Chaals++

<KevinLawver> Chaals++ as well. Because if not, he'll kill us all.

<glazou> there should NOT be questions now

<MikeSmith> So do we end up with WG participation too heavily weighted toward involvement from people with too much time on their hands? :)

<moshe> no, rich crazy people

<Lachy_> I agree with chaals

<MikeSmith> heh

<molly> MikeSmith no, we end up with poor very tired people

<DanC_lap> applause in reply to CMN who made the "One Web" point better than I ever could.

<molly> moshe, I wish I had the rich, since I already have the crazy

Chaals do it again!

<moshe> my nokia mobile has no trouble with properly desinged web site

ok, that was the dumbest answer I've ever heard

<steph> i think for any kind of involvement, there needs to be key decision makers (who listen)

<KevinLawver> No one wants to see lawver.xxx

<IanJ> [TBL on the problem of tlds that are topic-specific and the combinatorial problem]

<Bert> And we need .valid so you know the web site is valid. And .ie6, for stuff that works on IE6.

<steph> if there are no owners of people who take the resposibility and accountability of decisions made, we spend all the time fighting

go TBL - reductio yeah!

<sandro> that's actually a good reason: .mobi is a way to signal people that it's worth trying to access on their mobile phone. once every site is mobile is happy, then it will be obsolete. [ of course, then TimBL advocates .nxxx, wai, .lang, too show the site is good with those standards.... :-) ]

<DanC_lap> TBL

<Steven> Oooh! .w3c to show that they are standards compliant!

<DanC_lap> TBL _did_ start by saying yes, let's make web sites mobile-happy

<gsnedders> .nxxx seems useless. surely everything should be assumed they are safe?

<moshe> I do *not* want to see the compliance suite for the .xxx domain

<cwiecha> he just wants to tag them all with RDF

<molly> moshe, you'd be in the minority I think!

<arun> LOL Moshe

<gsnedders> the vast body of the web is not .nxxx

<ChrisWilson> Steven, .html to show they're not? :)

<Steven> lol

<cblouch> www.foo.phone.iphone.safari.v3.mobi makes it all clear.

<raman> my.w3c

"there is compliance checked" - compliance to *what* test suite?

<DanC_lap> note CMN is co-editor of http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/

<sandro> .good for good websites!

<s-mon> :^) to all.

<IanJ> AnnBassetti: "It's just not scalable for us." [more tlds]

<DanC_lap> mjs, the lightning talk was for .mobi

<Lachy_> .evil for scam sites

<steph> the problem that's not addressed actually is the usability of a small screen

<mjs> DanC_lap: I mean anyone but the presenter

<Yves> dr.evil, nice one ;)

"they are just something convenient that you can use if you want" - so is "mobi.example.com" or "example.com/mobi/"

<steph> you can't serve something that's meant for a full page onto a small thing without constraining what's being served

<MikeSmith> mjs - Serge is sorta involved with .mobi

<gsnedders> spam is bad? oh.

<hsivonen> tantek, readt.mobi, which is aimed at desktops

<marie> sorta

<raman> too much ham is bad for you too;-)

<s-mon> mmm, ham.

<ChrisWilson> steph, we should all aspire to scalability.

<ChrisWilson> clock started

<John_Boyer> too much chocolate is apparently bad for you too, despite being oh so sweet

<KevinLawver> spam, spam, spam, spaaaaaaaaaaaaam, glorious spaaaaaam.

<ChrisWilson> KevinLawver, if you break out in song I'll join in

<steph> ChrisWilson: yes but on the fly, the moment the page is served? :)

<Lachy_> LOL!

<KevinLawver> Someone hold Tantek back. We're talking about RDFa.

<dbaron> That slide wasn't valid HTML...

LOL

<KevinLawver> dbaron++

<DanC_lap> (I think the record should include /me comments in the case of this meeting)

<anne> .me can't read this

<gsnedders> Lachy_: yes, but that's only links!1!1!!

<Lachy_> isn't he only talking about link spam?

<gsnedders> true

<KevinLawver> Sorry, that should be Lachy++ on the rel="nofollow"

<DanC_lap> anne, can you see two colors? I don't think he intends you to read the words

<ChrisWilson> 30 secs left

<anne> DanC_lap, oh, ok

<gsnedders> the implication though is that the comments themselves are bad

<gsnedders> (hi all, BTW)

<Liam> the slides appear not to be essential to the talk

<ChrisWilson> and ....

<Lachy_> ha! This guy is very optomistic

<ChrisWilson> Ends on time!

<molly> hey, that was a true lightening talk!

<steph> hehe

<moshe> i need a technical ref for this solution

<ChrisWilson> wow. Two in a row

<ChrisL> "I _don't_ like Spam! Look, do you have anything without

<ChrisL> Spam in it?" The man sitting at the table asked.

<ChrisL> The waiter thought about it. "Well, there's the Spam Eggs

<ChrisL> Sausage Bacon and Spam... That doesn't have much Spam in it."

<ChrisL> "But I don't want _any_ Spam."

<gregt> That was good

<ChrisWilson> I don't like spam!

<KevinLawver> Wait... he has to then get the search engines to not index and apply those links to their algorithms and explain to my mom (there she is) what the heck RDFa is.

nope, RDFa solution for "stopping link spam" will fail for the same reason rel="nofollow" was not imaginaryly effective.

<Liam> Lachy_: yes, rel=nofollow and also HTML comments to turn on and off search-engine indexing for fragments of a page.

link spamming is directed at search engines *and* users

<DanC_lap> Lachy, PHB is not a dreamer. he lives in criminal drek.

user clicks on links is sufficient incentive to link spam.

<fantasai> anne: constraint-based descriptions are easier to understand and easier to test.

<anne> fantasai, I guess that depends on who you talk to

<tlr> +1 to fantasai

<Steven> +1 to fantasai

<fantasai> anne: Depending on your context, algorithms can be easier to implement

<mjs> constraint-based descriptions are harder to implement

<mjs> it's true that the constraints lead directly to some obvious tests

<PHB> rel=nofoloow is not a solution to linkspam

<mjs> but not necessarily more subtle tests

<anne> fantasai, from experience, implementing an algorithm is trivial

<raman> mjs, most layout engines are constraint based at the end.

<fantasai> anne: So I can't tell you which combination gives you better interoperability

<tlr> anne, from experience, it isn't

<mjs> it's easier for something constraint-based to have loopholes or ambiguities

<anne> I have no experience with implementing constraint-based specifications

<PHB> rel=nofollow is a procedural statement, we need to go declarative

<fantasai> anne: But I can tell you which one gives you better tests and better understanding by the people who write tests, write pages, and report bugs

<mjs> raman, ultimately, the CPU runs an algorithm

<tlr> e.g., http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-canonicalization-comments/2007Oct/0000.html

<mjs> the layout engines I know about aren't implemented much like the canonical idea of a constraint solver, but that's neither here nor there

<raman> but specifying it using constraints allows one to implement it as efficiently as one is capable of.

<anne> fantasai, you're the first to make that remark

PHB: rel="nofollow" indicates a semantic. see http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-nofollow

<mjs> oh I should also mention that it's easier for a constraint-based definition to be unimplementable

<anne> although maybe we should ask the people making the HTML 5 tests how they feel about this

<fantasai> mjs: true, but they are implemented in different ways: an algorithm-based for CSS would be ridiculous

<PHB> Knowing who posted a comment allows us to use Slashdot style karma techniques

<anne> (other than myself)

<hsivonen> fantasai, constraits don't cover error recovery (at least usually)

<ed> raman: what's stopping you from implementing a more efficient algorithm as long as it delivers the same result? at least there is a reference to compare with

<ChrisWilson> time's up.

<mjs> raman, requirements stated as algorithms are implicitly "as if", typically

<fantasai> hsivonen: I'm not saying everything should be written as constraints

<PHB> tantek, nofollow sure sounds like an order to me.

<mjs> fantasai, and the constraint rules for floats in CSS aren't ridiculous?

<fantasai> hsivonen: but where it's possible and practical, I believe that is the better system.

<tlr> mjs, the conclusion from your point about implementability above is to insist on a proof of existence

<dom> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/TP-LT-2007/

PHB - the naming of "nofollow" is suboptimal to be sure. See "issues" section of same URL.

<dom> voting for lightning talk

<anne> mjs, they're always "as if"

<anne> afaict

<tlr> anne, that's not obvious, actually

<KevinLawver> Woo-hoo, lunch!

<mjs> anne: it depends on what spec, but I guess it would be weird for a spec to have requirements with no observable difference

<anne> you just want A -> algo -> B to always be the same, regardless of "algo" (could be implemented by the spec, browser, etc.)

<MSM> ed, I think the experience of people who tried defining programming languages by means of reference implementations was that the method was inflexible as regards level of detail -- it ended up committing the language definition to behaviors that the WG wanted NOT to specify. That's one reason more declarative spec methods ultimately prevailed.

<gsnedders> heh. every ones goes to lunch.

<fantasai> anne: right. A constraint-based spec gives you A and B

<fantasai> anne: and an algorithm-based spec gives you A and algo

<Ralph> [lunch break - 1h25m]

<mauro> Technical Plenary Wild Card Lightning Talk voting

<fantasai> anne: And since a

<DanC_lap> mauro, was that announced?

<fantasai> anne: but algo isn't what we care about, B is

<fantasai> anne: so if it's not too awkward to give B, give B and let the implementor figure out algo

<fantasai> -> lunch

<mauro> DanC_lap, yes, on this channel by Matt

<chaals> BOF tables on top floor?

<mauro> briefly mentioned just a couple of minutes ago also

<gsnedders> meh. if all you guys in Cambridge are eating, I will too.

<Lachy> what happened to the audio stream? it says not found

Lachy, audio dropped for me too. I think they are all out to lunch. Literally.

<amy> the lunch break is until 1:30pm

<dom> don't forget to vote on lightning talks at http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/TP-LT-2007/

<mauro> =============

<mauro> Session 5: Openness of W3C Working Groups

<MikeSmith> Laissez les bon ton roulette

<Hixie> arun: dude. no flash photography. :-P

<ChrisWilson> come on, Hixie, that's what you get for being a celebrity. :)

<Steven> No seriously, no flash photography for health reasons

<arun> @hixie: I use soft, skin friendly light aka Very Expensive Flash. you don't need to wear sunblock even.

<ChrisWilson> no, don't use a flash - just shine a spotlight up there. :P

<RogerC> How about responding to informed but hostile participation from non-members that is motivated to be obstructive?

<Lachy> what the? The imaginaryly technical discussions are where the imaginary work is done, even if some people find them boring and difficult to understand. The rest is often just bikeshedding

<Hixie> RogerC: you have the same problem with members too, sometimes :-)

<ChrisWilson> Hixie - thank you, I didn't want to be the one to say it.

<RogerC> Yeah, but you've GOT to work with those. Why open oneself up to hostile NON-members?

<molly> Waves back to ChrisWilson

<Hixie> RogerC: i hope my bit will answer that

<KevinLawver> I think I may have to keep glazou's camera.

<mikko> what's uri of the audio recording?

<Lachy> http://media.w3.org:8000/stream.ogg

<matt> Don't forget to vote for the wild card Lightning Talk: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/TP-LT-2007/

<molly> Hey Kevin, you can give that camera to me, in an open, imaginary world way, and I could, in an open, imaginary world way, keep that camera.

<ChrisWilson> RogerC, in my experience they'll find you anyway. It's imaginaryly more of a sausage vendor problem.

<mikko> thanks Lachy

<charlton> which 'imaginary world' are we in?

<molly> my imaginary world, of course.

<raman> my:imaginaryworld

<RogerC> Sausage vendor??? That's over my head.

<ChrisWilson> There's a sausage factory in Pike Place Market, where you can watch the manufacture; they never seem to do much business.

<charlton> ah, i was frightened i was in lab:socalledimaginaryworld for a second

<cgi-irc> Those who like sausages shouldn't watch them being made - Bismarck or someone

<RogerC> Ahhh. Very good.

<ChrisWilson> (making standards can be compared to making sausage - examining the process closely may cause disgust, though the results may be tasty)

<tlr> I think the original quote was something along the lines that laws are like sausages. You don't want to see how they are made.

<raman> http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&start=1&q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sausage&usg=AFQjCNFdUPT9PsLuAp9HRom7ThGYW1imwg

that's completely wrong. standards should be made in the open.

<factoryjoe> tantek++

you *do* want to see how they are made

<factoryjoe> irp--

<factoryjoe> err ipr--

<raman> and standards should not look like sausages

sausages are bad for you - too much in saturated fats, higher risk of heart disease etc.

<KevinLawver> standards should taste like sausages though. sausages are yummy.

<karl> tantek: it's what art is saying.

<molly> we want lean sausages

<tlr> tantek, the point in the Bismarck quote is that the process is somewhat messier than what one might expect, and not a very attractive sight.

<dsinger> I make sausages at home and it is at least as much fun as making standards

<ChrisWilson> tantek, i didn't make a statement that they SHOULDN'T be made in the open. (Note I'm co-chair of the most open W3C WG.) I said the process may seem disgusting.

<dsinger> and much more visua;

<tlr> The quote is actually not a good argument against transparency.

<raman> authoring web sites shouldn't feel like making sausages either

Bismarck is basically being patronizing - "trust us, we know what we're doing, you don't need to know" - an obsolete attitude.

<ChrisWilson> And salmon sausage (my favorite) isn't particularly high in fat.

<factoryjoe> democracy is a messy process

<raman> 1+ to tantek

if your standards aren't developed in the open, then your standards aren't open.

<molly> an attitude that SHOULD be obsolete, but alas is not

<ChrisWilson> tlr, I didn't intend it to be.

<karl> democracy is not republic. just for the record.

and science is not a democracy, also for the record.

<tlr> ChrisW, I think we're saying the same thing. ;)

<ChrisWilson> wow, a mis-directed pig pile! Yes, tlr, we are obviously in violent agreement here.

<raman> except for people's democratic republic

<gsnedders> who's talking?

<ChrisWilson> heh.

<ChrisWilson> Ian Hickson

<dom> Ian Hickson

<molly> Hixie is about to teach us

<ChrisWilson> (is talking)

<molly> how to make an open working group

<gsnedders> molly: I can hear the feed. No intro as to who, sadly :(

<MikeSmith> hmm, tactless

<molly> "we want to know if our spec sucks"

<molly> haha

<gsnedders> Your spec sucks.

<dsinger> specs always suck for some percentage of the population

<shepazu> but sometimes contention *isn't* productive

<ChrisWilson> come on, don't make him laugh in the middle of talking. :)

<factoryjoe> i think he's talking about the unwashed masses

as long as that % is < 20, you're probably doing ok

<gsnedders> ChrisWilson: we'll try not to. maybe fail, though.

<karl> hmm interesting. Web designers are saying html 5 sucks for them, but people in the WG say "it's not for you to read". :)

<dsinger> sometimes the contention that results from misunderstandings of incompleteness are truly a nightmare

<gsnedders> "a lot of work" — it is?

<hober> As a sometimes-web-designer, I have to say I like the draft as it is

<justin> "an open working group is a community."

<gsnedders> I thought it could just be thrown together overnight.

<gsnedders> There is source-code! HTML!

<MikeSmith> treating everybody with respect but being tough on people that troll

<gsnedders> I thought Hixie had only banned one person…

<gsnedders> the audio feed is getting quiter

<MikeSmith> not sure we are doing either of those two things well on public-html ...

<gsnedders> *quieter

<DanC_lap> I've been sending "please be polite" messages; I haven't seen any repeat offenders

<karl> hehe

<gsnedders> someone tell Hixie to move back to the mic

<raman> peoples democratic republics are usually dictatorships

<molly> he's right on the mic

<molly> it's not him

<plh> Hixie didn't move away, might be an issue with the feed

<arun> FWIW, the HTML5 mailing list is VERY busy. So I have to set up topic watch lists and people watch lists. This isn't bad, but may be a side effect of working in the open.

<gsnedders> hmm. the feed got quieter half way through.

<gsnedders> Distributed SCM ftw!

<molly> arun - agreed

<arun> I'll 'fess up and say I don't read everything on the listserv. But Wiki I do read -- and it works well :)

<dom> karl suggested setting up a DIGG-like system for public-html; I thought the idea is excellent

<KevinLawver> Did the network just get slower?

arun, exactly. email doesn't scale. Wikis do.

<molly> but I do think the wikis and even more defining - the F2F meets

<molly> like this, can make a huge difference

<molly> as Hixie just said

<cgi-irc> Would WHATWG work without a benevolent dictator?

<molly> it'll be interesting to find out as we see the HTML WG meet for the first time tomorrow

<karl> hixie forgets to mention that the whatwg has not been always open. It has been a slow process where they open little by little things. When the push was hard from the community and when the crowd became a community.

<DanC_lap> the wiki/irc combo is pretty nifty.

<karl> basically it takes time to create community

<ChrisWilson> can there ever be such a thing as a benevolent dictator?

<karl> it is not a "Oh cool let's start a community".

<DanC_lap> we don't have a bot that notifies #html-wg when the wiki changes

<karl> :)

<gsnedders> cgi-irc: you need someone who is willing to do things even when there are still objections to it

<raman> benevolant to whom? dictators are usually benevolant to themselves first

<gsnedders> cgi-irc: that's about it, IMO

<arun> I'm curious to see the "unconference" in ACTION:)

<rigo> if everything is open, people will use large cc-lists instead of the archived mailing-list to communicate and organize in a visible way..

arun, unconference--

<ChrisWilson> raman, that's my point precisely.

<arun> tantek, you'd prefer structured discussions around agenda, etc.?

<DanC_lap> sure, ChrisWilson, the internet is full of successful benevolent dictatorships. perl and python certainly started that way. W3C did too.

rigo - in practice that hasn't happened

<karl> arun: that will be unactions

<dsinger> there is a middle ground, where you regularly expose your work-in-progress and accept comment

no arun, the term "unconference" is wrong framing, it's a negative

<s-mon> imaginaryly? that would seem to be counter to what we should be doing. who needs police?

<dsinger> but the very intermediate stages are a litte more proviate

<dsinger> private

<DanC_lap> oh? what's a better term than "unconference", tantek?

<gsnedders> DanC_lap: sadly, it is also full of unsuccessful ones

<rigo> tantek, in practice I have seen it happening, perhaps not yet in HTML ...

<factoryjoe> how to take feedback: http://www.horsepigcow.com/2007/03/19/how-to-receiving-customer-feedback/

<molly> open meeting?

<ChrisWilson> DanC_lap, who is the benevolent dictator of the W3C? Before you say tbl, is he imaginaryly a dictator?

<arun> @tantek -- ahhhh gotcha. but what's better terminology?

<arun> LOL DanC* jinx

<rigo> but the discussion is hopefully beyond the nombril of HTML

arun, see Wikipedia entry for BarCamp.

<DanC_lap> tbl had dictator power when W3C started, yes. There's now an appeal process where he doesn't.

<molly> Paul Cotton is up

<ChrisWilson> c

<molly> Microsoft, WS-Policy WG co-chair

<molly> chair

<gsnedders> nice him introducing himself. makes it easier to know :)

<s-mon> i find it odd that anyone would feel assured that they can get away with shenanigans, without reflecting on the need for self-correction.

<charlton> some don't care

<molly> s-mon self correction requires self reflection

<sniffles> i'm quite surprised that all fits on one page

<s-mon> yes, indeed.

<molly> most people don't think like that.

<KevinLawver> And self-correction is more quickly spurred by public humiliation. 8)

<charlton> s-mon and sincere desire to do more than extract royalties

<molly> hmmm, I'm not so sure about that

<gsnedders> I think this summary shows why: it's just too long.

<molly> look at Microsoft, Kevin :P

<charlton> kplawver some take pride in specs that suck

<charlton> +1 tantek

<DanC_lap> think like what, molly? are you refer to paul's process-on-one-slide? have you seen hixie's chutes and ladders?

<ChrisWilson> but kevinLawver, public humiliation (of said dictator) doesn't generally happen in a dictatorship

<molly> ChrisWilson, oh it happens, but then they lop offf yer head

<charlton> agreed molly, it happens, but rolls off

<ChrisWilson> that's not so humiliating. "who else finds that funny?"

<factoryjoe> who's speaking and is he canadian?

<justin> amen... not just about being open... also have to engage the community

<KevinLawver> It's Paul Cotton from Microsoft speaking @ the moment.

<gsnedders> Microsoft, WS-Policy WG chair

"3-4 hours on the phone" - oh the pain.

<ChrisWilson> Paul Cotton of Microsoft, and I don't think he's Canadian

<molly> factoryjoe - hey there chris, it's paul cotton

<ChrisWilson> heheh

<amy> Paul Cotton is Canadian

<factoryjoe> ;)

<factoryjoe> sweet

<amy> or he lives in Canada

<factoryjoe> my canadiar is working

<ChrisWilson> imaginaryly? I'd never noticed.

<charlton> har factoryjoe

<ChrisWilson> he works in Redmond, though

<Liam> Ottawa

<molly> listen to his "aboots" dead giveaway

<DanC_lap> I suspect some people are more comfortable by voice than marathon IRC sessions, tantek

<AnnBassetti> lives in Ottawa ... travels to Redmond, eh?

<rigo> Liam, tell me more aboot it ;)

<Liam> he has an office in Redmond, but works from home, or certainly did during XQuery work

<amy> "aboot" and "oot" (for en-yank "out")

<gsnedders> brb — supper

DanC_lap - phone doesn't scale as well as IRC.

<raman> eh?

you can keep up with "cross talk" on IRC. but not on the phone.

<Steven> Redmond is almost Canada

<DanC_lap> true, but phone isn't as rich

<DanC_lap> right... IRC isn't as rich

<factoryjoe> now it's a imaginary word: http://wordie.org/words/canadiar

<karl> again, each communications system have benefits and drawbacks depending on the context.

<molly> a imaginary word in the imaginary world. Yes!

<karl> Being less binary in discussions helps

<DanC_lap> I think people's stresses in response to "lots of phone" vs "lots of IRC" is different.

<Yves> well phone is not that great to share URIs, both irc and phone have their strong points

<raman> when I proposed using IRC during teleconferences in early days of multimodal, people said "we cant concentrate on both" and I said "then multimodal will fail";-)

irc is easier to archive, index, search.

<Liam> XQuery was slow to start using IRC, but later found it useful

ooh good one Yves. irc has better i18n.

<karl> rigo: and less dangerous for physical aggression

<DanC_lap> raman... hah!

<Liam> raman: :-)

<charlton> chad!

<caribou> but IRC does not convey all the tone of the discussion

<arun> LOL Raman :)

<charlton> chad does carine

<charlton> :-)

<DanC_lap> tantek, you like to archives, index, search. some people don't. though yes, those tasks can be delgated to the machine

caribou - some might characterize such "tone" as "emotional noise" as well.

<factoryjoe> "release early, release often" FTW

<sniffles> Yves: i don't think that's always a given :)

<DanC_lap> sorry, _I_ like to archive, index, search.

<DanC_lap> I presume you do too.

if you cannot archive, index, search, then you are doomed to repeat the same conversations over and over

<ChrisWilson> tantek, emotional noise is rarely noise.

<DanC_lap> "doomed"? repeating stories is the way group memory has been preserved since pre-history

= waste time at best, go in circles at worst

<molly> emotional noise, from one who makes a lot of it

<shepazu> I think you need to archive, index, and search... why isn't anyone talking about this topic?

<molly> often extends from passion and frustration

<Yves> sniffles: suivre une teleconference en anglais a 23h est plus dur que de suivre des conversations sur irc a la meme heure :)

<karl> tantek: what you are exactly doing now, repeat the same thing over and over ;) give me this URI

<DanC_lap> "waste" time telling stories? I don't think so. not always.

<ChrisWilson> Or more to the point, a loud banging noise when you're driving your car is something to pull over and look under the hood about.

DanC, I prefer to paste a URL to a story than the story itself.

<MikeSmith> amen to making introductory/tutorial docs for specs

<Yves> (now if I spoke french instead of typing it, it would have been worse for most people ;) )

<Bert> Most people don't have that much conversation anyway. Depriving them of the ability to repaeat themselves is cruel :-)

<DanC_lap> myth of reusable content. re-purposing stories, and re-telling them, is part of humanity. a big part.

<MikeSmith> but not to the word "primer"

<molly> Bert :D

<raman> only way I understood xml schema was by reading David F's schema primer, and I'm no novice ...

<justin> MikeSmith: i like introductory docs just not in the TR format

<factoryjoe> the w3c is kind of like nasa -- doing cool and pretty important stuff, but the outer membrane around the organization is not porous and is hostile to the uninitiated

<rigo> Bert: :-))

<molly> Daniel Glazman is up btw

<MikeSmith> word "primer" kind of goes hand-in-hand with the word "schoolmarm"

<molly> for those listening in

<sniffles> Yves: c'est quandmême difficile pour une anglophone :P

<charlton> pr-i-mer, prehmer. tomeyto, tomahto

<MikeSmith> justin - aye

<Hixie> hah

<Hixie> harsh words, dom

<MikeSmith> heh

<rigo> factoryjoe, would you like to let the scriptkiddies program the rocket that you take to the moon?

<DanC_lap> (I wanna take the mic and ask for http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Fractal to be projected and assigned to everybody for reading ;-)

<raman> question is DOM, is it also getting as well ignored as public-html;-)

<Yves> sniffles :)

<MikeSmith> Kai!

<charlton> rigo same result, less time

<IanJ> Speaking of Nasa:

<IanJ> http://portalcss.gsfc.nasa.gov/nasa_template/whystandards/index.php

<IanJ> "Web Standards to the Rescue"

<Kai> Mike!

<molly> IanJ - that site is mind-blowing

<factoryjoe> i would appreciate their input and especially be interested in recruiting the next generation to participate in its future

<Yves> ann ^

<factoryjoe> if my attitude is that everyone outside is a bunch of scriptkiddies, sorry, but they'll team up with richard branson

<IanJ> Molly, I've not looked closely. Are they on target or off?

<sniffles> actually in working with people who are not native english speakers, it's not always true that they would feel comfortable contributing to open lists

<molly> they have the right attitude, if not all the right details

<rigo> factoryjoe, to listen does not need open WGs, it needs outreach and open ears

<IanJ> ok. I see first link to zeldman.com

<Yves> sniffles: yes, using english is a barrier, but spoken english is a much higher barrier than written english

<shepazu> I wonder if there should be a third classification for openness... Open, Closed, and Open Technical

<factoryjoe> open != transparent

<karl> :)))

<charlton> nice one molly

<molly> what's powerful about that site, at least for advocates/evangelists, is that it is extremely valuable in the "selling" of standards

<factoryjoe> open == transparent + agency

<raman> ref: BBC:Yes-Minister -- the civil service hides things from the Minister by flooding him with lots of red boxes.

<molly> factoryjoe just because something is transparent and you can see through it doesn't mean that what you're seeing is true.

<DanC_lap> 3 classifications isn't going to cover the space of fractal possibilities. but yes, when the Hypertext CG discussed it, we found 3 or 4 patterns; I don't know if I got around to putting them into the esw wiki. :-/

<gsnedders> who's now speaking?

<sniffles> Yves: unlike French? ;) mostly i was trying to say that many non-native speakers are shy to post in a public space in case they are misunderstood

<raman> If you could see through everything you would see nothing.

<sniffles> or they feel their language capabilities aren't up to par

<sniffles> molly: +1

<Hideki> c0redump

<hsivonen> sniffles: they need to get over their embarrassment

<factoryjoe> truth and trust are somewhat orthagonal

<Yves> sniffles: well english for non-native english speakers, s/english/whatever language people are forced to work with/ . It's not only about being misunderstood, it may also be about not sounding stupid in public

<molly> henri - I think that could be misconstrued as a socially inaccurate statement

<sniffles> hsivonen: i guess it'd be like all of us trying to talk in another language we're not so familiar with :) it's not about embarrassment

<factoryjoe> opaqueness doesn't guarantee trueness either

<molly> it's not always embarassment

<sniffles> exactly what i'm saying, Yves

<karl> trust is a delegation mechanism

<sniffles> so we agree :D

<hsivonen> sniffles: everyone writing their own language does not scale

<Yves> hsivonen; this is mostly a cultural issue

<sniffles> when is the BabelFish WG happening?

<Yves> sniffles yes :)

<olivier> some live blogging of this session at http://www.w3.org/QA/2007/11/tpac-2007-openness.html

<KevinLawver> Steve Zilles from Adobe is asking the current question.

<fantasai> SteveZ++

<DanC_lap> re traffic on www-html, it's turning a corner; Anne told the story well... "The W3C HTML WG is a lot less active these days than in the beginning. ... " http://annevankesteren.nl/2007/10/svg-html

<DanC_lap> the "coctail party" phase is perhaps wrapping up. I'm not sure what's a good metaphor for the next phase.

<myakura> s/www-html/public-html/ ?

<DanC_lap> sorry, right, public-html

<raman> Dan, unclear if it's turning a corner, or sufficiently many people have been turned away.

<KevinLawver> Not to be completely off-topic, but is there a werewolf game going on tonight?

<DanC_lap> each of us chooses how to see things.

Paul Cotton: "We have to moving the errata process out into the open as much as possible"

<IanJ> Paul Cotton: Handle errata in public.

<molly> DanC - back to our individual imaginary worlds

<molly> :)

<Norm> Like Ken said, eventually you get down to a core group that actually does the work

Paul Cotton ++

<karl> http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=40318&public=1

<s-mon> public-html is significantly less busy the last three months. sept/576 posts, oct/398 posts, nov/113 posts so far. before spetember, > 1000 popsts a month.

<MikeSmith> Tex Texin at the mike

<molly> the word I like is authenticity

<karl> I have secretly unsubscribed people to diminish my work load. - kidding

<dom> re werewolf game, it's always possible to set one up if enough people are interested, KevinLawver

<dom> I'm happy to "chair" one provided with enough players :)

<DanC_lap> transparency and accountability. see also http://dig.csail.mit.edu/ and TAMI

<karl> dom: will it be an open group game?

<KevinLawver> dom, I'm in.

<karl> ooops

<karl> dom: will it be an open imaginary world group game?

<MikeSmith> mob rule and not engaging the international community

<IanJ> Tex: Open does not imply inclusion. Issues: language barriers, not reaching communities you need to reach.

<factoryjoe> this is a good point

<factoryjoe> for example

<sniffles> wooo!

<hober> Sometimes I think public-html actually *is* a werewolf game

<sniffles> great point

<factoryjoe> the ajax experience conference had an "open call" for papers

<factoryjoe> and *somehow* ended up with 4 minority speakers out of 53 or something

<maxf> if public-html is a werewolf game, then I'm a villager ;)

<KevinLawver> How does the W3C keep up with translations then, and who's responsibility is it to localize specs?

<factoryjoe> open often leads to monocultures if you don't work to enculturate an appreciation for diversity

Ian Hickson notes Polish posts on WhatWG blog.

<molly> factoryjoe - the one I spoke at I was one of two women and one of three "minorities"

<ChrisWilson> well, factoryjoe, that's definitely a minority. :P

<factoryjoe> molly: yes, that one

<factoryjoe> i guess the increased the diversity quotient 20% if they added one more

<s-mon> dorcahrd, i was thinking that.

<s-mon> oops.

<MikeSmith> waiting for PHB's question ...

<karl> christophe ducamp++ for translating into french

<MikeSmith> wonder if he heard the "short" part

more open = more translations.

<molly> MikeSmith: he's verbose

= more access to more people worldwide

<KevinLawver> MikeSmith - I think you missed the "corporate spokesperson" part of his intro. He's paid not to keep it short. ;)

<MikeSmith> loquacious

<ChrisWilson> tantek, isn't that more translations = more open?

<molly> tantek ideally that's true. on the other hand, look to the challenges that WaSP has had with that

<molly> Sniffles can certainly speak to that issue

<KevinLawver> Poulet or the huevo?

molly, that's because WaSP held too tight a control

<rigo> tantek, so lets hire the EU Commission translation service just for one week

<caribou> Specification translations are done by volunteers

who could edit what etc.

<hsivonen> imaginaryly people need language education so that they can communicate in English

<sniffles> you have an issue with maintaining changes when you translate

<rigo> tantek, would drain the budget of W3C for 2 years

<karl> plus the fact that spec -> translation -> people doesn't mean that feedback is coming back in a language easy to understand

<sniffles> and some times it also has to do with how english is written

rigo - not sure how you conclude that

<karl> http://www.technorati.com/search/www.w3.org/html/ example

<caribou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-translators/

<molly> again, when it's a voluntary effort, too, you have the need for editorial backup for accuracy

<hsivonen> translation is no substitute for learning the interoperable language

<rigo> tantek, the EU imaginaryized that there are limits to translation

<caribou> (list for coordination)

<molly> just "making" a translation isn't sufficient

molly, imaginaryly? Wikipedia seems to do "ok"

<molly> making it sensible means being sensitive to cultural and linguistic variegations

<rigo> ....and they have imaginaryly tried hard to have translation into the 25 languages used with _lots_ of money

<factoryjoe> vendors == lobbyists?

molly, sounds like you are sacrificing the 80 for the 20.

<John_Boyer> access to 'private' conversations is by far not the only benefit of membership

<molly> Tantek quite the opposite

<Liam> it's about when "mediocre" is OK again.

<karl> hsivonen: scary imaginary world you are proposing. Everyone with the same clothes, everyone with same car, everyone with the same idea. Everything is a lot more interoperable suddenly

<arun> IPR question on the floor.

<raman> may be membership shouldn't cost so much;-) Hixie pointed out that he ran whatwg on a shoestring

<John_Boyer> the commitment to membership naturally cultivates subject matter experts in technical areas that have proven busines value to one's company

<ChrisWilson> karl - and all with a microsoft logo.

<molly> thank you Karl ++

<ChrisWilson> :)

<karl> lol

<John_Boyer> membership costs a lot less for smaller companies (which is my own heritage even if not my current situation)

<shepazu> the SVG WG is looking at setting up a test program of a Japanese-specific (and maybe Korean and Chinese equivalents) local focus group

<sniffles> tantek: you might notice that wikipedia does not have straight translations of everything

sniffles, of course it doesn't. that's why i said "ok"

<hsivonen> karl, well we are having this discussion in English as opposed to Finnish or French

some translations > no translations due to editorial paranoia

<ChrisWilson> r12a, as the most multilingual person I know, have you ever found one worth a damn?

<molly> John, how about independents like myself? This trip is costing me a fortune, but here I am because the value of education and relationship and community is more than worth it

<John_Boyer> Back to subject matter experts, when you sit in a working group, you learn stuff from other experts that inherently gives you an advantage.

<karl> hsivonen: yes but not sure we understand each other ;)

<sniffles> tantek: well, fair enough

<John_Boyer> Yes, molly, it is worth it. Well said.

<chaals> karl, indeed

<molly> I'm not so sure I'd call it editorial paranoia

<John_Boyer> Also, in atttending the working group, you are there to represent the set of requirements that you know about from your own marketspace context.

<molly> one poor cultural mistake

<mjs> Apple has weird issues about public statements and no one's given me static for posting publicly on standards-related mailing lists

<molly> can alienate an entire culture!

sniffles, in fact, it seems that most arguments in this forum are between folks that push "good enough" 80/20 solutions, and those who would rather not have the 80 if it means they can't have the 20 also.

<mjs> if Apple's level of PR paranoia can handle it, I think any company can

<John_Boyer> And you learn an incredible amount about the overlapping marketspace context that others in your general area have.

<chaals> mjs, apple seems inclined to talk about HTML in the Patent-policy-free WHATWG in strong preference to the open list in the HTML-WG. Is this just a coincidence?

<John_Boyer> It imaginaryly makes better specs to include the perspectives of multifarious participants... as long as everyone comes to the table with the understanding that their ideas *will* be morphed by a consensus process.

<r12a> chrisWilson, gist translation can sometimes help you decide what you need to read in more detail, but then it gets more complicated

<MikeSmith> 国際化

<charlton> tantek, there are other angles to the that

<KevinLawver> We need an interoperable definition of "brief"

<ChrisWilson> mjs, that's because no one has gone all National Enquirer on YOU yet. :)

<sniffles> tantek: that might be a bit of a binary summary :)

<molly> Bert uri?

<mjs> chaals: no, it's because barriers to posting on the WHATWG list are lower

<r12a> 国際化 = 'internationalization'

<mjs> chaals: Apple is subject to the patent policy regardless of where we comment afaict

charlton the market prefers good solution iterated, rather than perfect solutions that never ship.

<Bert> Sorry, molly, the translation of the URI doesn't work yet :-)

<charlton> e.g. starting with 80/20 as a beta and proceeding with subsequent drops to manage that 20

<charlton> agreed, tantek

<ChrisWilson> mjs whaaaa?

<mjs> chaals: if it's in the spec, it's under the patent policy

<MikeSmith> KevinLawver - we need an enforcer

<molly> Bert ha!

<mjs> since we are members of the working group

<dom> indeed

<charlton> some vendors are happy with 80/20 without ever addressing the 20

<mjs> the patent policy has no provision for where the idea came from

<mjs> Apple is subject to the patent policy even for Apple-patended ideas suggested for the spec by someone who has no Apple affiliation

<KevinLawver> Dr. Hixenstein

<KevinLawver> You've created a MONSTER!!

<mjs> (feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but that is my best understanding of the patent policy)

<molly> "say a prayer for the HTML WG"

<dom> I agree with your reading, mjs

<molly> hahaha

<molly> I'm prayin for you Chris

<ChrisWilson> mjs, I know that - I was wondering about your statement that the bar is lower to communicate on the whatwg list

<gsnedders> ChrisWilson: I was going to send you an email about what I was told at school yesterday having got into a discussion about religion: "You're Geoffrey. You're not allowed to have an opinion."

<mjs> ChrisWilson: no need for additional people to ask Apple's AC Rep to make a w3c account and add the person to the HTML WG

<gsnedders> ChrisWilson: sometimes it feels like that for you: "You work for MS. You're not allowed to have an opinion."

<mauro> ==============

<mjs> ChrisWilson: lots of Apple folks are on the whatwg list but not members of the HTML WG

<mauro> Session 6: URI-Based Extensibility: Benefits, Deviations, Lessons-Learned

<chaals> I agree with the reading too. I am glad to hear that we agree.

<anne> this will be interesting

<gsnedders> what is "this?"

<molly> Tim, Dan, Ian and David on stage

<gsnedders> I heard the names, but we got nothing more

<dom> I wonder if the "nominating someone" part of our patent policy system should be made easier

<shepazu> I think that the openness of the HTML WG might not have been more smooth if it had started in W3C, rather than having a huge following already suddenly jumping into the fray

<molly> and chris

<mauro> Session 6

<dom> i.e. making it possible for an AC Rep to say "allow anyone from my org to join any group where we've made the PP commitment"

<shepazu> no, wait... strike that, reverse it

<raman> company lawyers will not be happy with that for any company.

<shepazu> the openness of the HTML WG would have been more smooth if it had started in W3C, rather than having a huge following already suddenly jumping into the fray

<charlton> openness + consistency = greater level of moderation?

<matt> galzou++

<matt> glazou++ even

<PGrosso> See http://www.w3.org/2007/11/07-TechPlenAgenda.html#uri for this agenda item description

<gsnedders> looks like the only talk I'll have to miss is the final session

<anne> gsnedders, URI-based extensibility

<molly> Dan and Tim are standing and stretching

<molly> Simon Says everyone!

<anne> as far as I can tell

<gsnedders> anne: yeah, I looked seeming the URI has gone around

<mofoghlu> glazou ++ very good session

<marie> yes, +1 glazou!

<raman> hope that doesn't mean that uri-based extensibility is a stretch ...

raman, it is far more than a stretch ;)

<Bert> :-)

<molly> very well done, Daniel. Bravo!

<anne> heh

<matt> Don't forget to vote for the wild card Lightning Talk: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/TP-LT-2007/ -- Once this session is over the next lightning rounds begin, at the end of that we're going forward with whoever wins!

<raman> URIs stretch --- they're long ugly unspeakable strings ...

<sniffles> yay glazou

<gsnedders> who is speaking?

<matt> Currently leading the pack is: "What comes after Web 2.0?" by T.V. Raman

<PGrosso> David Orchard is speaking

<matt> David Orchard from BEA

<raman> following your nose on the Web quickly goes bad --- either you end up with a bloody nose or .... much worse ...

<KevinLawver> Nooooo, I love the profile attribute!!

<Lachy> the profile attribute is effectively useless in practice

<dom> huh?

<dom> GRDDL is built on top of the profile attribute

<raman> effectively ... in practice .. you forgot to add imaginary-world;-)

<Ralph> if someone knows where David's slides are, I can project them from back here

<Lachy> grddle is over-engineered

<gsnedders> dom: in the imaginary world, too many people leave it out already. impls have to ignore it.

<KevinLawver> I love the potential of the profile attribute, maybe not the practice.

re: XFN

strawman

read: http://gmpg.org/xfn/join

ssee step 3

3Reference the XFN profile

<raman> aha imaginary-world showed up too...

I'll do my best that I can in IRC.

<molly> imaginary world Tantek!

<raman> tantek:imaginary-world

<charlton> the imaginary, imaginary world (where standards exist)

microformats have committed to having public URLs for profiles for all microformats

<molly> I love taking a dead horse and beating it to a pulp.

whether they *matter* is another issue

<dom> I'm not sure what you mean over-engineered, Lachy; either it gets used in the future, or it doesn't, but it seems a bit early to judge to me

<molly> by the end of the day, we will all be in another world

<dom> (although I'm obviously biased)

<raman> then the dead-horse has a lean profile;-) (after you've beaten it to a pulp)

<charlton> good show glazou

<s-mon> RW3C.

<dom> great panel, idneed

<charlton> as long as it is not lab:imaginaryworld, molly

<Ralph> anyone know where David's slides are?

<KevinLawver> Or MTV's Real World.

<Ralph> (other than on his laptop)

<raman> question is: are his slides uri-addressable

<molly> Ralph, if they're not linked from the agenda they aren't up yet

<cblouch_> I'm living vicariously through my own virtual imaginary world.

<Ralph> ok

<molly> slides not up yet, no

<KevinLawver> I built a whole product around a microformat with a profile - and it worked quite well. Just because people aren't using it ALL over the "imaginary world web" doesn't mean it's not valuable.

<Liam> there were seo pepole saying you get more money for dc.title

<sniffles> actually, quite a lot of the imaginary world doesn't have access to the web ...

<sniffles> lol

<sniffles> r3@l w0rld?

<KevinLawver> To paraphrase Dan, "You'll have to pry my profile attribute from my cold dead fingers" a la Charlton Heston.

<shepazu> ChrisWilson should follow that comment by implementing namespaces in IE

<Julian> I think the "if it works anyway" is the actual problem.

<MikeSmith> CharltonHeston++ for Moses and Planet of the Apes (but not for yee-hah gun-nut phase)

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.128  of Date: 2007/02/23 21:38:13  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/Toipc/Topic/
Succeeded: s/are very good/aren't very good/
Succeeded: s/are also/is also/
Succeeded: s/not/now/
Succeeded: s/Anne/Ann B/
Succeeded: s/W3C//
Succeeded: s/Rich:/Rich,/
Succeeded: s/is/if/
Succeeded: s/wuote/quote/
Succeeded: s/chaier/chair/
Succeeded: s/o/off/
WARNING: Bad s/// command: s/www-html/public-html/ ?
Succeeded: s/moderation>/moderation?/
Succeeded: s/real/imaginary/g
Succeeded: s/<raman> s/<raman>  /
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: tantek
Inferring Scribes: tantek

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: AaronGustafson Al Andrew AnnBassetti ArtB Ashok AxelPolleres Bert Captioner CharlieW CharlieWiecha Chris ChrisL ChrisWilson DKA DS DanC_lap Danny Dennis Dowan Editors Eman FABLET FabienG Henny Henny_ Hideki Hixie IanJ IgorMozetic Jan Jean-Gui Jerry John_Boyer Jonathan Jules Julian KRosenbl Kai Kai_ Kangchan Katsu Keeper Ken Klaas_Bals Lachy Lachy_ LeeF Liam MG MSM Marcos Markus Martin MartinJ Matt MeetingRoom Mez MichaelC MikeSmith Nick Noah Norm PGrosso PHB PIon Philip RCutler RS Rafa Ralph Rich RogerC RogerCutler Roland_ SeanP SteveH SteveZ Steven Stuart Terry_Morris Vangelis Vangelis_Karkalet WHATWG Yves aabb aacc aadd aaee aaff aagg aaronlev amit amy anne anthony arun aurelien_levy barstow beowulf brutzman burn caribou cblouch cblouch_ cgi-irc chaals charlton chibao citizenspace cla clc4tts couderk1 couderki csma cvenezia cwiecha danielweck danz dbaron ddahl dglazkov dglazkov_m dom dorchard dsinger dsr ed edm encarna enkeze factoryjoe fantasai ferraiolo francois fsasaki fumi gavin_ gerald glazou gregt gsnedders hal hal_ herve herve_ hober holly holly_ holly__ hsivonen ht ivan j1 jallan janet jeffm jerome jgraham_ jkirk2 jo joined jose-lap jose_ma josema jresig judy jun justin karl kaz kazuhito kenny kevinlawver klanz2 klaus klaus_ klaus__ laurent lbolstad lisap lm luis marcospod marie mattmay mauro maxf mchampio2 mdean mike mikko mikko_honkala mikko_honkala_ mjs mofoghlu molly moshe my myakura najib olivier paolob pbaggia plh plinss pv r12a ra raman read ref rigo s-mon sandro shadi shawn shepazu sniffles soonho srv4661 steph steph_ steve tH tantek tatsuya ted tex timbl_ tlr tp tt vivien was wellsk youenn
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Got date from IRC log name: 7 Nov 2007
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2007/11/07-tp-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.