IRC log of sml on 2008-01-17

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:01:06 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sml
19:01:06 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/01/17-sml-irc
19:01:13 [johnarwe]
johnarwe has joined #sml
19:01:23 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #sml
19:01:29 [Sandy]
Sandy has joined #sml
19:01:38 [jboucher]
Scribe: Jordan Boucher
19:01:45 [jboucher]
ScribeNick: jboucher
19:02:13 [jboucher]
Meeting: SML Teleconference 2008-01-17
19:02:29 [johnarwe]
zakim, this is sml
19:02:32 [Zakim]
johnarwe, this was already XML_SMLWG()2:00PM
19:02:34 [Zakim]
ok, johnarwe; that matches XML_SMLWG()2:00PM
19:02:49 [jboucher]
Chair: John
19:03:08 [johnarwe]
zakim, aadd is me
19:03:08 [Zakim]
+johnarwe; got it
19:03:09 [Valentina]
zakim, aabb is me
19:03:10 [Zakim]
+Valentina; got it
19:03:21 [Zakim]
+[Microsoft]
19:03:26 [ginny]
ginny has joined #sml
19:03:27 [zulah]
zulah has joined #sml
19:03:27 [kirk]
zakim, aacc is me
19:03:27 [Zakim]
+kirk; got it
19:03:37 [MSM]
MSM has changed the topic to: SML call 17 January http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2008Jan/0038.html
19:03:40 [Kumar]
Kumar has joined #sml
19:03:46 [MSM]
zakim, please call MSM-Office
19:03:46 [Zakim]
ok, MSM; the call is being made
19:03:47 [Zakim]
+MSM
19:03:48 [jboucher]
zakim, aaaa is me
19:03:48 [Zakim]
+jboucher; got it
19:03:55 [Jim]
Jim has joined #sml
19:04:09 [Zakim]
+ +1.610.277.aaee
19:04:43 [Zakim]
+??P14
19:05:04 [Zakim]
-??P14
19:05:28 [Zakim]
+ +1.530.823.aaff
19:05:35 [johnarwe]
06zakim, who's on the phone?01
19:05:50 [ginny]
zakim, aaff is me
19:05:50 [Zakim]
+ginny; got it
19:06:07 [johnarwe]
zakim, who's here?
19:06:07 [Zakim]
On the phone I see jboucher, Valentina, kirk, Sandy, johnarwe, [Microsoft], MSM, +1.610.277.aaee, ginny
19:06:09 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Jim, Kumar, zulah, ginny, Sandy, Zakim, johnarwe, RRSAgent, kirk, Valentina, jboucher, MSM, trackbot-ng
19:06:38 [Kumar]
zakim, [Microsoft] is me
19:06:38 [Zakim]
+Kumar; got it
19:06:49 [Jim]
zakim, aaee is me
19:06:49 [Zakim]
+Jim; got it
19:08:02 [jboucher]
Topic: roll call
19:08:11 [jboucher]
regrets: Pratul, Zulah (partial)
19:08:18 [jboucher]
Topic: approval of minutes
19:08:32 [jboucher]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2008Jan/att-0010/2008-01-03-minutes.htm
19:08:56 [jboucher]
Resolution: minutes approved
19:09:07 [jboucher]
Topic: overdue actions
19:10:53 [jboucher]
only 1 and Pratul is not present
19:10:59 [jboucher]
Topic: Bugs
19:12:00 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5368
19:12:12 [jboucher]
Kumar: mark editorial
19:13:10 [jboucher]
Resolution: so marked (by Ginny)
19:13:47 [jboucher]
Valentina: point 2 & 3 are fixed by webmaster, only 1 is editorial now
19:13:56 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5379
19:14:32 [jboucher]
John: needs agreement?
19:15:25 [jboucher]
Resolution: so marked, target LC
19:17:27 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5380
19:18:40 [jboucher]
Sandy: believes it is editorial
19:19:11 [jboucher]
Resolution: so marked, answer to Sandy's final question is no
19:19:22 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5382
19:21:34 [pratul]
pratul has joined #sml
19:22:32 [jboucher]
Kirk: mark editorial
19:23:03 [jboucher]
Resolution: so marked
19:23:09 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5383
19:23:45 [jboucher]
Kirk: mark editorial, perhaps revisit for EPR note
19:25:50 [jboucher]
Sandy: perhaps open a separate issue?
19:28:06 [jboucher]
Kirk: will open an issue for the EPR note component
19:29:00 [johnarwe]
Syntactically, the content of a locator can be a documentURI element defined by SML-IF or anything else understood by the consumer. Typically it is a URI, an XLink [XLink], or a Web Services Addressing endpoint reference [WS-Addressing Core].
19:29:37 [jboucher]
Resolution: mark 5383 editorial, open new issue for EPR note
19:29:59 [jboucher]
... remove the sentence starting with "Typically ..."
19:30:07 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5384
19:32:29 [jboucher]
Resolution: mark editorial, remove use of equivalent (and variants thereof)
19:32:34 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5386
19:34:04 [jboucher]
Resolution: mark editorial
19:34:12 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5387
19:36:14 [jboucher]
Kirk: addressed by content sent by Sandy earlier today
19:38:12 [johnarwe]
The SML URI Scheme can be used in an SML-IF [SML-IF 1.1] document to reference documents from the interchange set.
19:39:24 [jboucher]
Ginny: fixed right after the release of 3rd draft
19:39:37 [jboucher]
Ginny: mark won't fix
19:40:02 [jboucher]
Sandy: suggests duplicate instead
19:40:39 [jboucher]
Resolution: make it so
19:40:43 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5388
19:40:49 [jboucher]
Kirk: oh boy!
19:41:05 [jboucher]
Kirk: mark needs review
19:42:04 [jboucher]
Kirk: feels reference is overloaded and should be defined more clearly
19:44:58 [jboucher]
John: check use of reference used on its own and qualify them
19:45:27 [jboucher]
John: define SML reference and SML reference scheme
19:46:04 [jboucher]
Kirk: distinguish use of scheme carefully as well, wrt. xpointer scheme
19:48:27 [jboucher]
John: search and qualify use of scheme, in addition to reference
19:48:54 [ginny]
Resolution:
19:48:55 [ginny]
Define 2 terms - SML Reference (currently "Reference" in the terminology section) and SML Reference scheme (definition should indicate that it is different from xpath schemes)
19:48:57 [ginny]
Review all uses of unqualified "reference" and fix if necessary. Also review uses of "scheme".
19:48:58 [jboucher]
Resolution: mark needs review, proposal is as discussed above
19:49:45 [ginny]
s/xpath/xpointer/
19:50:14 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5389
19:50:36 [jboucher]
Valentia: mark editorial
19:50:50 [jboucher]
Resolution: so marked
19:51:28 [jboucher]
Topic: Needs Review Bugs
19:51:34 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4687
19:53:01 [jboucher]
John: has everyone had time? any objections to marking fixed?
19:53:05 [jboucher]
Resolution: so marked
19:54:06 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4774
19:54:45 [jboucher]
John: has everyone had time to review? any objections to marking fixed?
19:54:56 [jboucher]
Resolution: so marked
19:55:06 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4992
19:55:51 [jboucher]
Ginny: reviewed Sandy's suggestions and agrees
19:56:33 [jboucher]
John: Kirk to add a link to comments in email
19:57:19 [jboucher]
John: has everyone had time to review? any objections to marking fixed?
19:57:51 [jboucher]
s/fixed/editorial/
19:58:19 [jboucher]
Resolution: mark as editorial
19:58:49 [jboucher]
Topic: Needs Agreement Bugs
19:59:04 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5298
19:59:57 [jboucher]
Sandy: target is CR, so skip
20:00:06 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5396
20:02:07 [jboucher]
scratch 5396, it does not exist
20:02:12 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5306
20:14:17 [johnarwe]
Kirk, Kumar: discussion of possibly reducing scope down to schema complete and versoin
20:14:48 [johnarwe]
MSM: usefulness of version as a data-stamp, for debug, etc, but not for constraining consumers
20:15:35 [johnarwe]
...i.e. consumers must be required to proceed in the face of unknown versions, if (in a practical sense) you want to be able to deploy future versions.
20:20:44 [johnarwe]
...MSM strongly recommends using version numbers. eg a 1.0 consumer, receiving a 2.0 document, still must attempt to process the 2.0 document (as a 1.0 document with some unknown extensions). Since 1.0 consumers are not allowed to just fail based on the version number, a disincentive to deploying 2.0 producers is absent.
20:21:25 [johnarwe]
... If the 2.0 format also happens to be 1.0-compliant, works fine.
20:26:07 [jboucher]
John: Kirk to rev proposal per scope discussed above
20:26:33 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5341
20:26:51 [jboucher]
Sandy: also a CR target
20:27:13 [jboucher]
... skip it
20:27:20 [jboucher]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5379
20:28:11 [jboucher]
MSM: my analysis has not progressed since last week, some by F2F next week
20:28:59 [jboucher]
Kumar: some idea of where you are going?
20:30:42 [jboucher]
MSM: yes, leaning towards all constraints on types and elements (and lots more summary stated on phone)
20:39:04 [jboucher]
Kumar: what is the value of allowing constraints on both types and elements?
20:42:07 [jboucher]
MSM: a reason is to allow acyclic and target* to defined in the same places
20:44:04 [jboucher]
... a 2nd reason is wrt language design choices/patterns
20:45:38 [jboucher]
Ginny: I totally agree with MSM
20:50:00 [jboucher]
... 1) prefer working in types, 2) require good reasons for restrictions, 3) support consistency
20:51:55 [jboucher]
Sandy: certain constraints make sense on elements but not types, XML schema examples support this pattern
20:54:25 [jboucher]
John: points out design perspectives may have varied on decision points
20:54:49 [jboucher]
... why do it this way? vs. why not do it this way?
20:55:38 [jboucher]
... what use case supports the decision? or, contradicts it?
20:56:24 [jboucher]
Ginny: acyclic was discussed for weeks and determined to be needed on types
20:59:24 [Jim]
have to leave now.
20:59:27 [jboucher]
Kumar: suggests impact to existing models is too great to allow target* on types
21:00:23 [Zakim]
-Jim
21:00:30 [jboucher]
MSM: suggests taking some further discussion into an email thread
21:01:16 [Zakim]
-Kumar
21:01:18 [jboucher]
rrsagent, make log public
21:01:33 [jboucher]
rrsagent, draft minutes
21:01:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/01/17-sml-minutes.html jboucher
21:02:16 [Zakim]
-kirk
21:02:40 [Zakim]
-Sandy
21:03:04 [Zakim]
-ginny
21:03:06 [Zakim]
-Valentina
21:03:08 [Zakim]
-jboucher
21:03:09 [Zakim]
-johnarwe
21:03:14 [Zakim]
-MSM
21:03:15 [Zakim]
XML_SMLWG()2:00PM has ended
21:03:17 [Zakim]
Attendees were +1.303.495.aaaa, +1.905.413.aabb, +1.603.823.aacc, Sandy, +1.845.433.aadd, johnarwe, Valentina, kirk, MSM, jboucher, +1.610.277.aaee, +1.530.823.aaff, ginny, Kumar,
21:03:19 [Zakim]
... Jim
21:03:21 [ginny]
/quit
21:03:33 [jboucher]
rrsagent, bye
21:03:33 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items