IRC log of tagmem on 2008-05-21

Timestamps are in UTC.

08:22:15 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
08:22:15 [RRSAgent]
logging to
08:26:44 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
08:31:24 [Stuart]
zakim, agenda ?
08:31:24 [Zakim]
I see 5 items remaining on the agenda:
08:31:25 [Zakim]
12. WebArch Vol 2 [from DanC_lap]
08:31:26 [Zakim]
15. Distributed Extensibility [from DanC_lap]
08:31:28 [Zakim]
16. UrnsAndRegistries-50 [from DanC_lap]
08:31:29 [Zakim]
13. "Rich Client" Technologies [from DanC_lap]
08:31:30 [Zakim]
14. XML Versioning-41 [from DanC_lap]
08:31:53 [DanC_lap]
DanC_lap has joined #tagmem
08:32:05 [DanC_lap]
Zakim, next item
08:32:05 [Zakim]
agendum 12. "WebArch Vol 2" taken up [from DanC_lap]
08:32:07 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
08:32:15 [noah]
scribenick: noah
08:32:19 [noah]
scribe: Noah Mendelsohn
08:32:39 [noah]
meeting: TAG F2F - Bristol - Wed. Morning 21 May 2008
08:32:41 [ht]
ht has joined #tagmem
08:32:42 [noah]
date: 21 May 2008
08:32:46 [noah]
chair: Stuart Williams
08:32:46 [DanC_lap]
08:32:51 [trackbot-ng]
ACTION-106 -- Norman Walsh to make a pass over the WebArch 2.0 doc't which adds a paragraph, and connects up to issues list -- due 2008-05-08 -- OPEN
08:32:51 [trackbot-ng]
08:32:57 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #tagmem
08:33:05 [noah]
present: to be supplied
08:33:11 [noah]
regrets: T.V. Raman
08:33:22 [timbl],51.607296,-2.586062,7807118962301585161,51.455181,-2.619705&saddr=4+Rodney+Pl,+Bristol,+Avon,+BS8+4HY+(Rodney+Hotel)&daddr=The+Village,+Littleton-upon-Severn,+Bristol,+Avon,+BS35+1NR+(The+White+Hart+Inn)&mra=pe&mrcr=0&sll=51.504041,-2.563248&sspn=0.215414,0.462799&ie=UTF8&ll=51.607753,-2.585027&spn=0.002642,0.004581&t=h&z=18
08:33:28 [noah]
topic: Web Architecture Document Volume 2
08:33:29 [dorchard]
dorchard has joined #tagmem
08:33:32 [timbl]
08:33:56 [noah]
SW: We've talked about this before. Norm reports no progress on ACTION-30.
08:34:05 [noah]
NW: That's right, I'm sorry I didn't get to it.
08:34:27 [noah]
SW: I'm not sure how we get started.
08:35:20 [DanC_lap]
08:35:22 [trackbot-ng]
ACTION-106 -- Norman Walsh to make a pass over the WebArch 2.0 doc't which adds a paragraph, and connects up to issues list -- due 2008-06-05 -- OPEN
08:35:22 [trackbot-ng]
08:36:55 [noah]
NM: Calling the discussion "Volume 2" prejudices the discussion a bit. We may want to do a lot of our work in a new edition of the current volume. The ultimate result should be document(s) the readers perceive as well organized.
08:37:24 [noah]
JR: We don't want to do technology for technology's sake, or writing for writing's sake. Would doing a use cases and/or requirements analysis might be one way to focus the goals.
08:37:33 [noah]
SW: We have a skeletal outline.
08:37:40 [noah]
(Norm goes to look for it.)
08:38:21 [Norm]
08:38:32 [noah]
SW: We've had substantive discussion of Semantic Web, clients with richer application behavior. There's also the question of doing maintenance work on what we've already done.
08:38:52 [noah]
JR: Maybe we should be goal based. Is the goal to influence certain groups to do certain things?
08:39:38 [noah]
TBL: Describing the Web as a system, from the top level and as an integrated story, is important.
08:40:56 [noah]
TBL: The reason the topic areas seem disjoint is that having started sort of top down on the table of contents for Volume 1, we found that some areas were contentious and some not. Still, it's important that what we're shooting for is to tell one consistent story.
08:41:11 [noah]
Norm finds the list of topics at:
08:42:47 [noah]
JR: The purpose of the finding is to convince certain people to do certain things.
08:43:57 [noah]
NM: I think the audience is broader than one might thing. For example, I often use Web arch to educate people who are not coding applications, but who are making decisions like whether their mobile phone applications should integrate with the Web to provide a service to their users. From that they learn that they'll have to tell their programmers to identify things with URIs, etc.
08:44:19 [noah]
JR: The question is how do you decide which project to work on.
08:44:24 [noah]
08:44:59 [noah]
TBL: Maybe the top level document should say the obvious things without very much depth. Consider naming. It's important, but not separate from other aspects of the Web.
08:45:32 [noah]
TBL: Viewed from one perspective, the Semantic Web is just one format or set of formats.
08:45:57 [noah]
TBL: There are other questions about how AJAX works with the web.
08:46:06 [noah]
JR: Maybe use cases, as Noah has been talking about.
08:46:40 [Norm]
08:49:04 [timbl]
q+ to mention origin of the TAG in WG questions
08:49:14 [Stuart]
ack Norm
08:49:47 [jar]
jar has joined #tagmem
08:50:04 [noah]
NM: I think we sometimes have to publish the things where we've been able to make some progress. Sometimes we set a few priorities, but find that we can only generate good insights into some areas, not all of which are entirely predictable. So, we should at least consider sharing the things where we've made good progress.
08:50:44 [Norm]
ack Norm
08:50:56 [noah]
NW: I think that the business of working in a document, producing drafts, actually focusses our work.
08:51:11 [noah]
NW: Also, looking at mining the information in the findings can be useful.
08:52:11 [noah]
TBL: The TAG was formed in part because working groups used to be told "you can't do that, it's not how the Web works", but there was no common point of reference for how the Web really does work. Now that we have the mandate, we work in two modes: sometimes we are responsive to an external question or an issue that arises, but sometimes we are proactive in setting priorities.
08:54:18 [noah]
TBL: When we produced Web Architecture Volume 1, many people told us it was useful. So, we weren't just satisfying ourselves. This time, I would like to see more formal methods, though.
08:54:34 [noah]
JR: I still think we could do a more careful job of capturing those goals and dynamics.
08:54:36 [timbl]
08:54:52 [noah]
SW: I think there are three bullet points in the TAG charter that pretty much capture what Tim said.
08:55:21 [noah]
q+ dorchard
08:55:33 [DanC_lap]
ack timbl
08:55:33 [Zakim]
timbl, you wanted to mention origin of the TAG in WG questions
08:55:40 [DanC_lap]
ack dorchard
08:56:05 [Stuart]
Mission statement
08:56:05 [Stuart]
The mission of the TAG is stewardship of the Web architecture. There are three aspects to this mission:
08:56:05 [Stuart]
to document and build consensus around principles of Web architecture and to interpret and clarify these principles when necessary;
08:56:05 [Stuart]
to resolve issues involving general Web architecture brought to the TAG;
08:56:05 [Stuart]
to help coordinate cross-technology architecture developments inside and outside W3C.
08:56:21 [Stuart]
08:57:25 [DanC_lap]
q+ to noodle on events, e.g. Future of Web Apps
08:57:39 [noah]
DO: I like a lot of what we've talked about doing either in Vol 2. or updates to Vol. 1. Doing versioning and/or self-describing Web and/or distributed extensibility would be really great, but.... I still feel as I've said before, that there's a huge buzz around AJAX, social networks, and the "latest cool things", and it's not clear to me that we're doing a poor job of helping them. Not sure what to suggest, but it feels like it could be a good goal to re
08:57:40 [DanC_lap]
ack danc
08:57:40 [Zakim]
DanC_lap, you wanted to noodle on events, e.g. Future of Web Apps
08:59:25 [noah]
DC: I haven't heard anyone talk about usefulness of Web Arch. vol 1 in awhile. So, I'm interested in focussing on events like the Future of Web Apps. There's likely to be discussion of some things like the future of Twitter is. Would anyone like to talk about interesting conferences and how we could both have impact and be influenced by their needs?
08:59:30 [noah]
DO: Yes, that would be great.
08:59:43 [noah]
DC: We had some presence at XTech, and that seemed good.
09:00:53 [noah]
DO: Supernova's coming up in San Francisco in June.
09:01:31 [noah]
NW: Supernova 2008 (
09:01:35 [DanC_lap]
(hm... )
09:02:02 [noah]
NM: Should we go through the details on these things here, or agree to do in email?
09:02:05 [noah]
DC: I prefer here.
09:02:55 [Stuart]
09:04:18 [noah]
NM: I'm still enthusiastic about the idea of doing a piece of a TAG Web site that would be a really cool, useful tutorial and introduction to why Web architecture matters, and how to apply it.
09:04:43 [noah]
SW: Books, such as Web Architecture in a Nutshell or something of that ilk would be useful.
09:04:50 [noah]
JR: Not sure we can pick up much more work.
09:05:06 [noah]
DC: The nice thing about blog articles is that we don't have to agree before publishing.
09:05:20 [noah]
NM: Yes, we've decided to use our blog that way, and it seems to be proving useful.
09:06:25 [noah]
DC: I would have liked to talk about Javascript security, but we've since learned that in certain respects it's purposely obscure.
09:07:14 [DanC_lap]
that wasn't my point:
09:07:33 [DanC_lap]
DC: yes, javascript security is another topic where I'd like to know what forums/conferences are the place to talk about it
09:07:35 [noah]
SW: I need guidance as to how we make progress.
09:08:00 [noah]
DO: The issue has come up about walled gardens like Facebook in which things are not properly identified with URIs.
09:08:42 [DanC_lap]
(jar mentioned reviews in blog items... I tend to microblog in bookmark services... I have ~180 in )
09:09:13 [Stuart]
09:09:18 [Stuart]
09:09:21 [timbl]
09:09:32 [Stuart]
ack tim
09:09:49 [noah]
NM: Engaging folks like Facebook would be great, if not necessarily easy on a subject like this, but I'm not sure how it informs what we'd write in a new edition of WebArch.
09:11:17 [noah]
TBL: One of the social network issues is: how does my social networking site get a list of friends from your site. One good answer of course is, it should be retrieved as a document probably using a technology like RDF. Then you find that you need what can be rather complex 3rd party authentication systems like oauth. Interesting that so much of this is being driven by the "friends list" use case.
09:12:14 [noah]
TBL: At the moment, it's not being done RESTfully. Now, all of this is being done in service to building applications that integrate data from two or more social networking sites. You can imagine doing this in the browser if you like.
09:12:21 [noah]
DO: Oauth is pretty cool in how it uses URIs.
09:13:19 [noah]
TBL: It does a lot of redirects. We looked at OpenID and the number of round trips is large. Oauth seems to do even more. Popping up: it would be really interesting to ask "how would you do something like this better using Web Arch"/
09:14:10 [noah]
DO: What would that look like? What would we on the TAG do? Look at OpenID and oauth from a Web Arch perspective.
09:14:26 [noah]
TBL: Yes those ,but also the larger problem of portability of things like friends lists.
09:14:44 [noah]
09:14:52 [noah]
q+ to mention rich clients
09:18:40 [DanC_lap]
Zakim, remind us in 10 minutes to take a break
09:18:40 [Zakim]
ok, DanC_lap
09:19:51 [noah]
NM: I'm not sure what to do about it, but if the sorts of applications one sees with Flash and Silverlight become more and more ubiquitous, we might ask what if anything Web Arch Ed. 2 should do to help you know how to build apps with that level of function (not necessarily using those proprietary technologies). There's some risk that by the time we publish, we'll be talking about applications that look a bit old fashioned.
09:20:00 [Stuart]
09:20:24 [Stuart]
q+ to pick up on industrial archeaology
09:20:41 [noah]
HT: Often what we're doing can be best viewed as industrial archeology. We often do best when we look back.
09:21:24 [noah]
HT: So, Noah, I'm not sure those rich technologies belong in our document.
09:21:32 [timbl]
09:22:38 [noah]
NM: I agree actually. I tried to signal that I too think we often do best when we look back, but it runs the risk that by the time we say anything we don't influence the people who can still make choices about new things.
09:22:42 [noah]
09:23:58 [noah]
DO: Someone has to figure out how to "put pen to paper". Once it gets done, I would be interested in putting a subset of the compatibility strategies into Web Arch vol 2. For example, Web Arch v.1 says "use version ids", and we've decided the story needs to be more subtle than that.
09:25:21 [noah]
SW: (Stuart shows a picture of a useful bridge over a river that's made in cast iron, using a design meant for wood). This is a good example of how architecture does not always come first.
09:25:40 [noah]
SW: I got this from a talk by Peter Williams, who used to work here at HP.
09:25:57 [Stuart]
09:26:02 [DanC_lap]
09:27:20 [noah]
SW: Perhaps we need to start by doing a thorough review of Web Arch. vol 1?
09:28:41 [Zakim]
DanC_lap, you asked to be reminded at this time to take a break
09:29:31 [noah]
JR: Aren't the revisions a separate bit from the new stuff.
09:29:46 [noah]
SW: Revising is expensive, so doing it for one piece isn't a good bet.
09:30:25 [noah]
q+ to say there are deeper reasons for doing revisions together with new stuff
09:30:42 [noah]
09:30:47 [noah]
q+ to say there are deeper reasons for doing revisions together with new stuff
09:30:52 [DanC_lap]
ack Stuart
09:30:52 [Zakim]
Stuart, you wanted to pick up on industrial archeaology
09:30:52 [noah]
ack stuart
09:33:05 [noah]
NM: I think we need to focus not so much on separating revisions from new stuff, but on creating a document or documents that will serve the community for 3-5 years. We'll find out what's revised, what's new, and how it's best organized as we go, I think.
09:33:14 [DanC_lap]
09:33:14 [trackbot-ng]
ACTION-106 -- Norman Walsh to make a pass over the WebArch 2.0 doc't which adds a paragraph, and connects up to issues list -- due 2008-06-05 -- OPEN
09:33:14 [trackbot-ng]
09:34:01 [noah]
NW: I have an action to add details to our working list of possible priorities and to link them to our issues list. I suggest that the next time we should discuss Web Arch future is after I complete that action.
09:34:08 [noah]
SW: I suggest we do as Norm suggests.
09:35:19 [noah]
JR: I wonder if we need to collect things other than what are in
09:35:27 [noah]
SW: Yes, but it's a start. We'll change as necessary.
09:36:23 [noah]
SW: I think that some of figuring out what needs to be done comes of reviewing what we've already done. I think we've heard that reviewing the written works like findings and AWWW vol. 1 is something that individual members will do as they see fit.
09:36:30 [noah]
JR: Where do we do this.
09:36:38 [noah]
JR: Where do we do this?
09:36:53 [noah]
SW: At least in www-tag, maybe sometimes in the TAG blog.
09:37:02 [noah]
09:37:44 [DanC_lap]
close action-114
09:37:44 [trackbot-ng]
ACTION-114 Henry to find the counter example that made it necesseary to make a terniary relationship closed
09:37:48 [DanC_lap]
close action-115
09:37:48 [trackbot-ng]
ACTION-115 Henry to improve the presentation of the way the ontology reconstructs RDDL 'purpose', and to attempt to address skw's concern about the subject of the so-called purpose relation closed
10:00:38 [DanC_lap]
Zakim, next item
10:00:38 [Zakim]
I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, DanC_lap
10:00:49 [DanC_lap]
10:00:57 [DanC_lap]
Zakim, next item
10:00:57 [Zakim]
agendum 15. "Distributed Extensibility" taken up [from DanC_lap]
10:01:30 [noah]
topic: Distributed Extensibility
10:02:00 [DanC_lap]
10:02:11 [noah]
HT: Maybe we need to talk about how to get HTML and XML to converge? We have Sam Ruby's proposal, the IE8 proposed function, etc.
10:02:35 [DanC_lap]
^ sam ruby on distributed extensibility
10:03:18 [DanC_lap]
-> ISSUE-41 Decentralized extensibility in the HTML WG
10:03:55 [noah]
HT: We've also talked about implicit namespace bindings. These could be implicit in the media-type, perhaps written into the specifications e.g. if svg; aria: prefixes were "written into" the HTML specification. So, these are things that led me to suggest putting this back on the agenda.
10:04:46 [DanC_lap]
Maciej Stachowiak
10:05:56 [noah]
TBL: Someone (Macieg Stachowiak?) has suggested having the occurrence of an element implicitly bind a namespace. Another would be to declare in a specification that you can find by following your nose that, e.g., in HTML, the occurrence of a certain element such as SVG would trigger the binding.
10:06:17 [noah]
TBL: Alternative would be to have "svg:" prebound in HTML.
10:07:19 [ht]
q+ to mention the difference between RDF and SVG
10:07:20 [noah]
TBL: The idea is to get a smooth slope, where millions of people can do the easy thing easily, but it scales architecturally to the general case with the full URI.
10:12:51 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
10:24:24 [timbl]
Got a pointer?
10:25:02 [timbl]
I feel it is important that the HTML5 spec be split into smaller chunks.
10:25:14 [noah]
TBL: I feel it is important that the HTML5 spec be split into smaller chunks.
10:25:33 [noah]
DO: I think Roy Fielding has made similar comments.
10:28:26 [noah]
SW: We received an invitation from Ian Hickson to review the HTML 5 spec:
10:29:19 [noah]
HT: What's the right way for us to say that it's going to be very challenging to review something that large. If we could find a way to agree to focus on more specific pieces, that might be helpful.
10:29:59 [noah]
TBL: I think Roy's feedback was fundamentally "where's the core language definition?" I think that would probably be roughly mine too.
10:30:11 [noah]
DC: I want to send comments primarily where it's likely to produce useful action.
10:42:24 [DanC_lap]
found Fielding's remarks that DO alluded to: "This draft has almost nothing to do with HTML. It is a treatise on browser behavior. That is a fine standard to have, but deserves a different title so that the folks who just want to implement HTML can do so without any of this operational/DOM nonsense." --
11:01:18 [noah]
DC: I'm trying to figure out how many MIME types there should be for HMTL. Some people believe there should be application/xhtml+xml in addition to text/html. There's a point of view I might share that xhtml+xml isn't going to take off in practice, but some people feel very strongly we need to make xhtml+xml work.
11:01:20 [noah]
11:01:24 [noah]
Ashok: pass
11:01:29 [noah]
Stuart: 1
11:01:34 [noah]
DO: strong 1
11:02:05 [noah]
NM: bits of opinions, but not coherent or informed enough, so I suppose I pass
11:02:09 [DanC_lap]
(I realize this poll is more about tagSoupIntegration than distribute extensibility)
11:02:13 [noah]
HT: Now or in the long run
11:02:17 [noah]
DC: Long run.
11:02:29 [noah]
HT: 1, but only the very long run.
11:02:33 [noah]
NM: text/html
11:03:05 [noah]
HT: Um, not sure. As long as XHTML 1.n has any traction at all, I want an XML media type for it. Because I want what follows from that.
11:03:13 [noah]
q+ to talk about mixins in media types
11:03:31 [Norm]
In an informal poll, mostly what Henry said, 1 if it's application/xml+html. If I can't have *that* one, then two. I guess.
11:03:42 [noah]
HT: Until we have some single thing that is really "both", with good statutory grounding.
11:04:10 [noah]
NW: Mostly what Henry said. Ultimately 1, if I could make it the xml one.
11:04:27 [noah]
DC: If we get 1, it will have to do all the non-clean XML stuff, so text/html (1)
11:05:04 [noah]
JR: If the distinction gives you information that's useful early that's good, but I'm not sure I care as long as whatever we get supports "follow your nose"
11:05:12 [DanC_lap]
s,if we get 1,if application/xhtml+xml gets poular,
11:06:54 [DanC_lap]
DC: FYI, Sam Ruby argues for 2.
11:07:23 [noah]
TLB: Convergence is really important between HTML and XML. Because there's only one HTML. I'm not sure that having no "+xml" in the mime type explicitly is something one can work around as a special case, converting to xml as necessary. I don't resent +xml, but I think text/html should migrate smoothly to xml over time. BTW: text/* should perhaps migrate to UTF-8.
11:08:30 [noah]
JR: What's the nature of the distinction. You're not going to treat the text differently. You can get the information from 3 places: from the media-type, from the start of file. If you can heuristically do a parser that "does the right thing", that might work.
11:09:23 [noah]
NM: If the media type spec says you can interpret as XML iff the head of the file looks like XML, then it's OK. You can't do it, e.g. for text/plain.
11:09:45 [noah]
JR: I wonder if 2 is the wrong number.
11:10:51 [noah]
11:11:14 [noah]
ack ht
11:11:14 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to mention the difference between RDF and SVG
11:12:26 [ht]
11:12:30 [ht]
ack noah
11:12:30 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to talk about mixins in media types
11:14:52 [DanC_lap]
11:14:52 [trackbot-ng]
ISSUE-9 -- Why does the Web use mime types and not URIs? -- CLOSED
11:14:52 [trackbot-ng]
11:15:23 [jar]
q+ jar to say metadata ( link header) can do what media types can't
11:15:30 [noah]
NM: I tend to feel that one architectural issue is the lack of richness in the structure and semantics of media type names. If you had mixing semantics, you could come closer to saying "oh, by the way, this text/html or this text/plain happens to be well formed XML"
11:16:32 [noah]
HT: RDFa is an example of a small vocabularly of which you can say "it's not obviously wrong to say that you should just negotiate with the HTML WG to make them part of the HTML base language". RDFa has a handful of elements, ARIA, more, SVG has a large number of elements and MATHML more. All are enumerated in the specs.
11:17:24 [noah]
HT: If I were approaching this a priori and adding RDFa to my <spans>, I would like to write <span my:foo="xxx"> where my:foo is an RDF relation. What's interesting is that my:foo's are open-ended.
11:18:27 [noah]
HT: It seems to me that the tail has been wagging the dog in designing RDFa. In a sense, the reason we're not seeing a strong example of the need for distributed extensibility is that the lack of namespace-based extensibility in HTML bounded the discussion to require at most a few new attributes,
11:18:51 [noah]
DC: Your view of the aesthetics may be in the minority.
11:19:29 [noah]
DC: DTD-based validators are part of what drives this. Also, people who work with markup languages believe that tags are "holy".
11:19:35 [noah]
HT: Attributes sometimes feel different.
11:21:20 [noah]
NM: One thing you get from the explicit list of a few attributes is that a client that doesn't understand my:foo at least knows you're trying to do RDFa, and knows to ignore it if uninterested.
11:22:28 [noah]
HT: RDFa wants support in browsers.
11:24:03 [noah]
NM: I think that whether there are various RDFa add ins to browsers or built in support isn't the point. It gets built in iff it so happens that the same function is needed by a large class of users. If lots of users need different function, then selectable addins are right.
11:25:45 [noah]
SW: The relationship to HTMl 4.01 XHTML 1.1 DOM2 HTML section in the HTML 5 draft positions HTML 5 as successor to XHTML. Yet, it seems not carry forward capabilities like modularization that depend on namespaces.
11:26:22 [noah]
HT: The XHTML modularization spec uses a trick that you (Dan) and I discovered independently to allow flexibility of prefixes with DTDs.
11:26:39 [noah]
DC: Adequate is in the eye of the beholder. The workgroups seem to disagree.
11:26:59 [noah]
DC: Some people believe that all that happens is that attributes were added, and the availability of a fancy schema to describe them is secondary.
11:27:25 [jar]
11:27:46 [DanC_lap]
ack jar
11:27:47 [Zakim]
jar, you wanted to say metadata ( link header) can do what media types can't
11:28:20 [noah]
JR: Metadata in link headers might take some pressure off the urge to enrich mime types.
11:30:54 [DanC_lap]
(hmm... I thought Adjourn meant the end of the whole meeting, but nope... "To adjourn means to suspend until a later stated time." -- )
12:32:27 [Norm]
Norm has joined #tagmem
12:33:35 [Stuart]
zakim, agenda?
12:33:35 [Zakim]
I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
12:33:36 [Zakim]
15. Distributed Extensibility [from DanC_lap]
12:33:37 [Zakim]
16. UrnsAndRegistries-50 [from DanC_lap]
12:33:38 [Zakim]
13. "Rich Client" Technologies [from DanC_lap]
12:33:39 [Zakim]
14. XML Versioning-41 [from DanC_lap]
12:35:01 [DanC_lap]
Zakim, close item 15
12:35:01 [Zakim]
I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, DanC_lap
12:35:06 [DanC_lap]
12:35:24 [Ashok]
scribenick: Ashok
12:35:54 [Ashok]
SW: There was some discussion of versioning -- should we allocate time for it
12:36:19 [Ashok]
HT: We shd allocate time for JAR to present
12:36:46 [DanC_lap]
q- ht
12:36:49 [DanC_lap]
Zakim, next item
12:36:49 [Zakim]
agendum 16. "UrnsAndRegistries-50" taken up [from DanC_lap]
12:37:08 [Ashok]
Passing baton to Dave and Henry
12:37:27 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
12:37:40 [Ashok]
HT: We sent msg to ARIA folks
12:38:04 [Ashok]
Dave drafted a doc for the tag blog and asked me to look at it
12:39:09 [Ashok]
I spent a fair bit of time on the point that XRIs allowed chacraters that are not allowed in URIs
12:39:18 [Ashok]
This proved to be a mistake
12:39:57 [Ashok]
So, HT has not reviewed Dave blog entry yet
12:40:17 [Ashok]
DO: I can wait till tomorrow
12:41:04 [Ashok]
HT: I'm going to update the doc I prepared for Vancouver
12:41:06 [DanC_lap]
12:41:06 [trackbot-ng]
ACTION-33 -- Henry S. Thompson to revise URNsAndRegistries-50 finding in response to F2F discussion -- due 2008-03-27 -- OPEN
12:41:06 [trackbot-ng]
12:41:42 [Ashok]
Next: Rich Clients
12:41:43 [ht]
s/update/update the finding using/
12:42:09 [Stuart]
agenda+ Admin: F2F meetings beyond Sept 2008
12:42:26 [Ashok]
NM: Introduces the subject
12:42:31 [noah]
noah has joined #tagmem
12:42:59 [Ashok]
Machines and technologies continue to get more powerful
12:43:38 [DanC_lap]
(let the record show that the web-with-images came BEFORE the text-only web; it's just that the text-only web got more widely deployed than the NeXT client in early days)
12:43:50 [Ashok]
We now have Flash and Silverlight
12:45:11 [Ashok]
These provide rich animation etc.
12:46:00 [Ashok]
MS persuaded NBC to broadcast Olympics using Silverlight
12:46:42 [Ashok]
Pushing Web towards new types of apps and interfaces
12:47:25 [Ashok]
This raises significant issues for the Web
12:48:45 [Ashok]
Can be used to enhance advertising
12:49:26 [Ashok]
More and more content being creating in these proprietary formats
12:50:23 [Ashok]
They deliver over HTTP but violate law of least power
12:51:16 [Ashok]
Cannot copy/paste to clipboard, cannot do view source
12:51:35 [DanC_lap]
q+ to note that the new flash client has p2p support
12:52:47 [Ashok]
NM: I think this is important. Is this someting we shd worry abt?
12:52:55 [Stuart]
ack danc
12:52:55 [Zakim]
DanC_lap, you wanted to note that the new flash client has p2p support
12:54:24 [Ashok]
DC: Adaptive video streaming over HTTP
12:54:50 [Ashok]
Chop up vidoe into small bits
12:55:07 [Ashok]
12:56:03 [Ashok]
Move Networks does this
12:56:29 [Ashok]
Strategic relationship with MS
12:56:35 [Stuart]
12:57:03 [Ashok]
DC: Network protocol is going on among proprietary players
12:59:30 [jar]
q+ to be random (threats, technical fixes, systematic problems)
12:59:54 [Ashok]
SW: ISP are being stressed by video content and want more money
13:00:58 [Stuart]
13:01:17 [DanC_lap]
ack jar
13:01:17 [Zakim]
jar, you wanted to be random (threats, technical fixes, systematic problems)
13:01:20 [Stuart]
ack jar
13:02:19 [Ashok]
JAR: We are acted on behalf of the public. what might we do or say?
13:02:28 [Ashok]
13:03:36 [DanC_lap]
aha... found the flash/p2p item...
13:03:49 [Ashok]
13:03:56 [DanC_lap]
-> Flash P2P: Now That’s Disruptive Om Malik, Thursday, May 15, 2008 at 9:00 PM PT
13:05:21 [noah]
q+ to respond to Jonathan
13:06:28 [Ashok]
JAR: The technical part to fix these problems is not hard
13:06:46 [Ashok]
No, to ask Noah a question
13:07:17 [Stuart]
ack noah
13:07:17 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to respond to Jonathan
13:07:19 [noah]
The mission of the TAG is stewardship of the Web architecture. There are three aspects to this mission:
13:07:19 [noah]
1. to document and build consensus around principles of Web architecture and to interpret and clarify these principles when necessary;
13:07:19 [noah]
2. to resolve issues involving general Web architecture brought to the TAG;
13:07:19 [noah]
3. to help coordinate cross-technology architecture developments inside and outside W3C.
13:07:52 [ht]
q+ to point to old blog entry
13:09:05 [Ashok]
NM: We cd do a TAG finding that these technologies lack some features
13:10:18 [Ashok]
The W3C could line up and discuss how to make tese guys better citizens on the web
13:11:27 [Ashok]
13:12:20 [Ashok]
DO: I think it's worth doing something
13:12:31 [Stuart]
13:12:50 [Stuart]
ack ashok
13:13:14 [Ashok]
AM: Shd we start standards efforts in these directions
13:13:58 [Ashok]
NM: If we can get the right people
13:14:54 [Ashok]
DC: Disagrees -- standards are low risk. They work best when market has figured out where it is going
13:16:46 [timbl]
13:16:50 [timbl]
13:17:15 [Stuart]
13:17:45 [Ashok]
DC: The big deal I see is some combination of authoring tools and teaching people to author
13:19:52 [Ashok]
NM: Possible to get open source "widgets" for Flash etc.
13:20:04 [Stuart]
ack timbl
13:22:26 [Stuart]
ack ht
13:22:26 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to point to old blog entry
13:22:32 [ht]
13:24:09 [Ashok]
The basic Web story is dependent on the resource you get whan you do a GET.
13:24:31 [DanC_lap]
q+ to note the least power issue in DVD-next-gen standards:"> <-
13:24:35 [DanC_lap]
13:24:42 [DanC_lap] <-
13:25:05 [Ashok]
This is attentuated by new technologies ... whole story is being compromised
13:25:20 [Stuart]
q+ to mention WAF Access Control for Web Resources.
13:26:06 [timbl]
(Noah, By the way, )
13:26:09 [timbl]
13:26:10 [Ashok]
Threatens the foundations of the Web model
13:26:11 [Stuart]
ack DanC
13:26:11 [Zakim]
DanC_lap, you wanted to note the least power issue in DVD-next-gen standards: <-
13:26:13 [Zakim]
13:26:19 [timbl]
q+ timbl to suggest different scenarios
13:26:33 [DanC_lap]
"Blueray requires an implementation of Java on all Blueray players to run the interactive menus on those systems ... HD-DVD’s menu system is stored in a standardized document format"
13:26:34 [Ashok]
DC: Least power shows up in DVD standardization
13:26:56 [Stuart]
ack Stuart
13:26:56 [Zakim]
Stuart, you wanted to mention WAF Access Control for Web Resources.
13:27:17 [DanC_lap]
HT and TBL note that HD-DVD has folded
13:28:31 [Ashok]
SW: WAF talks abt access control of resources by resources
13:29:05 [Ashok]
HT: Ties in with ida that Browsers are not the only user agent
13:29:18 [Ashok]
13:29:39 [Ashok]
Bits that are on the page has less and less to do with what the user sees
13:30:06 [Ashok]
GOOGLE is putting huge effort into image reco.
13:31:05 [Ashok]
HT: Parge ralk algo has changed. Olden days most pages were hand authored.
13:31:16 [Ashok]
13:31:30 [Ashok]
13:31:35 [ht]
Today most pages are synthesised more or less automatically
13:32:13 [ht]
I believe that google's ranking of pages today makes relatively little use of the original incoming-links-based 'page rank' number
13:32:40 [Ashok]
TinBL: Hypertext anology does not work
13:32:50 [Stuart]
What I said was about lack of webarch vocab and coverage of user agent threads of behaviours. WAF document speaks of controlling access to resources by resources, but that the thing actually performing access is a thread of execution in a UA rather than the first party resource that loaded the page.
13:33:09 [Ashok]
13:33:13 [ht]
HST remembers to point people to Sean McGrath's XTech closing keynote. . .
13:33:33 [Stuart]
s/that loaded the page/from which the page was loaded/
13:33:53 [Stuart]
13:35:45 [Ashok]
TimBL: There is a lot of procedural code to do what they want to do. We cd encourage them to be more declarative
13:37:26 [ht]
Lots of food for thought here:,%20Oxen%20and%20Ogham%20stones_%20Mulling%20the%20movable%20Web%20Presentation.pdf
13:38:20 [Ashok]
NM: URIs are not always as seprable as you think
13:38:37 [Ashok]
13:38:53 [Ashok]
SW: Can talk about concrete next steps
13:38:54 [ht]
Particularly page 63
13:39:12 [Ashok]
DO: We cd talk abt why walled gardens are bad
13:39:37 [DanC_lap]
(I think "walled gardens" like facebook are an important part of the marketplace)
13:39:38 [Ashok]
DO: We cd do usecases re. Flash and Silverlight
13:42:10 [Ashok]
NW: That's a great place to start
13:43:37 [timbl]
TBL: There are three different scenarios we should distinguish. One, people use flash to make a web site which is still very much hypertext and would be much more reusable if declarative. Two, flash (etc) is used to make a user interface which is not hyopertext at all. Like Slife, tabulator, or maps. there is a concept of identify or place, so URIs are relevant, and indded SL has sluris. Different URI schemes may be appropriate here. Three, the procedural
13:43:48 [Ashok]
HT: I wd recommend Sean McGraths keynote above
13:45:39 [ht]
Text of one conclusion therein (slide 63): "What we might loose?
13:45:39 [ht]
Hypertext and deep linking as we know it.
13:45:39 [ht]
Search as we know it (!)
13:45:39 [ht]
“Emergent properties” as we have come to know
13:45:39 [ht]
them – mashups, folksonomies etc.
13:45:40 [ht]
UI simplicity. Grandma won't be able to “surf”
13:45:42 [ht]
13:46:17 [Ashok]
HT: Quotes above from the keynote
13:48:16 [DanC_lap]
(phpht. the KC meeting isn't in the schedule on . )
13:48:19 [Ashok]
SW: Talks abt future mtgs after Sep
13:48:38 [Ashok]
HT: f2f East coast early Dec
13:48:49 [ht]
NW: Bad idea -- XML Conference
13:49:25 [Ashok]
SW: Tim, did you say Southhampton Oct/Nov?
13:50:18 [DanC_lap]
23-25 September in Kansas City --
13:50:20 [Ashok]
SW: Where wd we like to meet after Sept?
13:50:40 [Ashok]
NW: Proposes Jan
13:54:53 [Ashok]
DC: Goes to whiteboard to try and work out dates
13:59:40 [Ashok]
NW: Dec 11,12
14:00:34 [Ashok]
In Cambridge Dec 10,12
14:02:28 [Ashok]
ACTION: Stuart to put up Web poll re. dates for Dec 10-12 f2f
14:02:28 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-157 - Put up Web poll re. dates for Dec 10-12 f2f [on Stuart Williams - due 2008-05-28].
14:03:17 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
14:03:30 [DanC_lap]
RESOLVED: to than the Hosts, with applause
14:04:49 [DanC_lap]
... the hosts here at HP and Amanda at the Williams home
14:05:05 [Ashok]
TAG members thank HP and Amanda Williams for their hospitality
14:06:01 [DanC_lap]
14:06:06 [Ashok]
Break ... resuming at 2:30
14:06:15 [DanC_lap]
Zakim, close item 16
14:06:15 [Zakim]
I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, DanC_lap
14:06:17 [DanC_lap]
Zakim, close item 13
14:06:18 [Zakim]
agendum 13, "Rich Client" Technologies, closed
14:06:20 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:06:21 [Zakim]
16. UrnsAndRegistries-50 [from DanC_lap]
14:06:39 [DanC_lap]
14:06:43 [DanC_lap]
ack timbl
14:06:43 [Zakim]
timbl, you wanted to suggest different scenarios
14:06:47 [DanC_lap]
Zakim, close item 16
14:06:47 [Zakim]
agendum 16, UrnsAndRegistries-50, closed
14:06:48 [Zakim]
I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:06:50 [Zakim]
14. XML Versioning-41 [from DanC_lap]
14:06:55 [DanC_lap]
Zakim, close item 17
14:06:55 [Zakim]
agendum 17, Admin: F2F meetings beyond Sept 2008, closed
14:06:56 [Zakim]
I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
14:06:58 [Zakim]
14. XML Versioning-41 [from DanC_lap]
14:35:59 [Ashok]
Resuming after the break
14:36:14 [Ashok]
DO will discuss changes to the document
14:37:22 [Ashok]
Added section in Section 2 dealing with failure outcomes
14:39:23 [Ashok]
JAR: Need to discuss outcomes where language is accepted but processor does the wrong thing
14:45:53 [Ashok]
Discussion of wording on section 2
14:47:43 [dorchard]
Applications succesfully process texts of an older version of a language.
14:49:47 [dorchard]
A newer language is backwards compatible with a newer language if an application written to the newer language successfully process texts of the older language.
14:50:24 [dorchard]
A newer language is backwards compatible with an older language if an application written to the newer language successfully process texts of the older language
14:50:49 [Stuart]
"A change in the definition of a language is backward compatible if consumers of the evolved language can correctly process text written for the previous version of the language."
14:53:17 [Ashok]
Agreement on above wording
14:53:34 [Ashok]
The last from Stuart
14:55:33 [Ashok]
NM: Instead of "We specify ...
14:56:34 [Ashok]
NM "For the incompatible startgeies there are a range of possible ...
14:57:12 [Ashok]
14:59:51 [Ashok]
NM: In second to last para encourage people to think abt versioning early
15:03:08 [Ashok]
NM: 3rd para of 2.1 -- Apps are written to assume a particular version of the text
15:03:20 [DanC_lap]
Zakim, give each speaker 2 minutes
15:03:22 [Zakim]
ok, DanC_lap
15:03:26 [DanC_lap]
ack noah
15:04:55 [Ashok]
NM: Or check a version id and choose the right one
15:05:23 [DanC_lap]
Zakim, stop timing speakers
15:05:23 [Zakim]
ok, DanC_lap
15:05:31 [Ashok]
SW: I wish this was all normalized into compatible and incompatible changes to the languages
15:09:45 [Norm]
15:09:59 [DanC_lap]
(I don't think we *need* to define compatibilty in terms of application behavior, but I think talking about that way is straightforward )
15:10:28 [Ashok]
AM agrees with DanC
15:12:29 [Norm]
15:15:22 [Norm]
I don't actually think we talk about the compatibility of applications
15:15:59 [Stuart]
15:19:27 [Norm]
q+ to observe that intended to be versioned and extensible don't work for me
15:19:28 [Ashok]
Section 5 -- Text of Ed Note
15:20:07 [noah]
q+ to explain why dave's option 1 makes me unhappy
15:20:16 [Stuart]
q+ jar
15:21:17 [Ashok]
NW: The second version does not scan
15:22:22 [Ashok]
NM: Against the first one
15:24:43 [Stuart]
15:24:53 [DanC_lap]
ack Norm
15:24:53 [Zakim]
Norm, you wanted to observe that intended to be versioned and extensible don't work for me
15:24:56 [DanC_lap]
ack no
15:24:56 [Zakim]
noah, you wanted to explain why dave's option 1 makes me unhappy
15:24:57 [Stuart]
q- norm
15:25:00 [DanC_lap]
ack noah
15:25:04 [DanC_lap]
ack jar
15:25:05 [Stuart]
ack jar
15:25:39 [Ashok]
JAR: Perhaps we need a better version of the second alternative
15:25:47 [Norm]
Part of the problem here is the scope. I expect most of the readers of this document to be thinking about designing an XML language, not ASCII or XML.
15:25:59 [DanC_lap]
noodling... "To facilitate independent evolution of producers and consumers, languages in distributed systems should be extensible"
15:26:37 [DanC_lap]
noodling... "Extensible languages facilitate independent evolution of parties in a distributed system"
15:26:38 [Ashok]
AM: Norm, this was my comment abt the scope of the document
15:26:51 [DanC_lap]
15:27:37 [Stuart]
ack DanC
15:29:58 [Ashok]
JAR: Echoes Dan's sentiment
15:31:11 [Ashok]
DO and NM can live with "To facilitate independent evolution of producers and consumers, languages in distributed systems should be extensible"
15:31:56 [Ashok]
DO: Any objections to the above
15:32:03 [Ashok]
No objections
15:33:21 [DanC_lap]
RRSAgent, pointer?
15:33:21 [RRSAgent]
15:34:39 [Ashok]
ACTION: JAR to write up thought son versioning and share with the group
15:34:40 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-158 - Write up thought son versioning and share with the group [on Jonathan Rees - due 2008-05-28].
15:35:27 [Ashok]
Vote of Thanks to SW and HP for hosting
15:35:46 [jar]
s/t son/ts on/
15:36:17 [Ashok]
rrsagent, make logs public
15:37:26 [Ashok]
ACTION : David to update compatibility strategies document in response to f2f discussion
15:37:26 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-159 - Update compatibility strategies document in response to f2f discussion [on David Orchard - due 2008-05-28].
15:38:21 [Ashok]
rrsagent, make logs public
16:30:22 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
16:38:25 [timbl_]
timbl_ has joined #tagmem
18:07:29 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem