IRC log of html-wg on 2009-01-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

17:00:49 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #html-wg
17:00:49 [RRSAgent]
logging to
17:00:50 [gsnedders]
takkaria: JPEG, I guess.
17:00:53 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #html-wg
17:00:57 [DanC]
Zakim, this is HTML
17:01:05 [Zakim]
ok, DanC; that matches HTML_WG()12:00PM
17:01:15 [Zakim]
17:01:17 [Zakim]
17:01:21 [Zakim]
17:01:31 [DanC]
Topic: Convene
17:01:36 [DanC]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
17:01:36 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Masinter, Julian, Sam, Matt_May, DanC, [Microsoft]
17:01:51 [DanC]
scribe: DanC
17:01:57 [oedipus]
zakim, pass?
17:02:05 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, oedipus.
17:02:12 [takkaria]
gsnedders: yeah, but I thought JPEG was pretty much done with these days
17:02:12 [Zakim]
17:02:18 [rubys]
zakim, codes?
17:02:19 [hsivonen]
Zakim, ??P40 is me
17:02:23 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, rubys.
17:02:25 [Zakim]
+hsivonen; got it
17:02:33 [DanC]
Zakim, code?
17:02:34 [Zakim]
the conference code is 4865 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.117.370.6152), DanC
17:02:40 [DanC]
17:02:41 [pimpbot]
Title: {agenda} HTML WG telcon 2009-01-22 [w/addendum] from Sam Ruby on 2009-01-21 ( from January to March 2009) (at
17:03:08 [Zakim]
17:03:13 [hsivonen]
my regrets for the second half of the call (I have to leave in 30 minutes)
17:03:22 [Zakim]
17:03:24 [DanC]
Zakim, [Microsoft] is Cynthia_Shelly
17:03:24 [Zakim]
+Cynthia_Shelly; got it
17:03:40 [Zakim]
17:03:54 [oedipus]
zakim, who is here?
17:03:55 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Masinter, Julian, Sam, Matt_May, DanC, Cynthia_Shelly, hsivonen, Shepazu, Gregory_Rosmaita, [Microsoft]
17:04:00 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, DanC, Joshue, masinter, dsinger, rubys, oedipus, ChrisWilson, adrianba, laplink, smedero, zcorpan, deane, billmason, aroben, aaronlev, gavin_, Julian,
17:04:03 [DanC]
Topic: Issue states
17:04:05 [Zakim]
... MichaelC, ed_work, darobin, Dashiva, marcos, Lachy, tlr, ROBOd, heycam, rking3, shepazu, sryo, anne, gsnedders, hober, phenny, xover, karl, drry, pimpbot, krijnh, jgraham,
17:04:07 [Zakim]
... timelyx, wilhelm, gavin, deltab, Shunsuke, matt, Hixie, trackbot, inimino, hsivonen, jmb, Philip, Yudai, takkaria
17:04:14 [aaronlev]
aaronlev has left #html-wg
17:04:16 [adrianba]
Zakim, [Microsoft] is adrianba
17:04:16 [Zakim]
+adrianba; got it
17:04:24 [DanC]
Sam: note update to issue states in
17:04:25 [cyns]
cyns has joined #html-wg
17:04:26 [Zakim]
17:04:28 [pimpbot]
Title: HTML - ESW Wiki (at
17:04:30 [DanC]
(no comments)
17:04:31 [ChrisWilson]
zakim, microsoft is me
17:04:31 [Zakim]
+ChrisWilson; got it
17:04:41 [DanC]
(last edited 2009-01-20 23:06:24 by SamRuby)
17:04:58 [DanC]
Topic: ISSUE-59 (normative-language-reference)
17:05:06 [rubys]
17:05:08 [pimpbot]
Title: HTML 5: The Markup Language (at
17:05:14 [hsivonen]
17:05:30 [DanC]
Sam: I propose we publish
17:05:31 [pimpbot]
Title: HTML 5: The Markup Language (at
17:05:41 [Zakim]
17:06:00 [DanC]
hsivonen: I object to publishing it as a normative spec; it's valuable, but having 2 normative documents is a problem...
17:06:31 [DanC]
... also, markup-spec basically includes the schema from , and I don't think it should be normative
17:06:40 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #html-wg
17:07:03 [DanC]
... if it weren't my schema, I would like that, so on behalf of potential competitors, I don't think we should do that
17:07:07 [billyjackass]
billyjackass has joined #html-wg
17:07:40 [billyjackass]
Zakim, call-Mike-Mobile
17:07:40 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'call-Mike-Mobile', billyjackass
17:07:48 [deane]
I object to publishing the markup-spec, it hasn't been reviewed by the group. There are other reasons for objecting, but I would rather discuss in email
17:08:26 [DanC]
Sam: I hear your arguments; neither this doc nor the HTML 5 spec enjoys consensus; do you think your argument should prevent publication?
17:08:26 [Julian]
depends on the definition of "publish"
17:08:42 [MikeSmith]
Zakim, call Mike-Mobile
17:08:42 [Zakim]
ok, MikeSmith; the call is being made
17:08:43 [Zakim]
17:08:54 [oedipus]
q+ to ask naively why does this document exist? what is its relationship to the HTML5 spec as submitted to W3C
17:09:04 [oedipus]
ack h
17:09:16 [DanC]
hsivonen: publishing as WD suggests an eventual REC, yes?
17:09:17 [deane]
The spec has been discussed at length by the group though
17:09:35 [MikeSmith]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
17:09:35 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Masinter, Julian, Sam, Matt_May, DanC, Cynthia_Shelly, hsivonen, Shepazu, Gregory_Rosmaita, adrianba, ChrisWilson, Shawn_Medero, Mike
17:09:40 [oedipus]
17:09:57 [DanC]
[missed some; hope it wasn't essential technical stuff]
17:10:11 [deane]
publishing the spec is in the charter, it's not a new concept like the "markup-spec"
17:10:39 [oedipus]
ack me
17:10:39 [Zakim]
oedipus, you wanted to ask naively why does this document exist? what is its relationship to the HTML5 spec as submitted to W3C
17:10:48 [shepazu]
17:11:34 [DanC]
Sam: the HTML 5 spec has a number of things that are controversial; the TAG asked us to look at other approaches, and this is one... the proposal to publish isn't a guarantee of its outcome
17:11:36 [Julian]
17:11:56 [oedipus]
GJR: note or REC track?
17:12:21 [DanC]
Sam: regarding 2 normative specs, I think competition would be healthy
17:12:30 [DanC]
... we can continue to discuss this proposal in the mailing list
17:13:09 [masinter]
17:13:14 [hsivonen]
IIRC, it isn't a proper subset
17:13:17 [DanC]
Julian: my understanding is that the html-markup spec is derived not only from the schema but also text from the HTML 5 spec. it has sections pulled from the HTML 5 spec
17:13:30 [DanC]
ack Julian
17:13:43 [deane]
Sam, the HTML WG, has never decided if we need a markup-spec, so I don't think it's appropriate to publish
17:14:04 [Julian]
ack masinter
17:14:10 [DanC]
17:14:25 [DanC]
Masinter: are people objecting to discussion of publication?
17:14:39 [marcos]
marcos has joined #html-wg
17:14:39 [deane]
It all arose from misinformation (like most things)
17:15:53 [deane]
I wasn't joking
17:16:02 [deane]
17:16:15 [DanC]
DanC: I understand the proposal to be to publish, not to discuss publishing. This WG takes several days between when questions are put and when the outcome of the decision is announced
17:16:29 [DanC]
Sam: I'd like to have a high bar for objections...
17:16:32 [dsinger]
when did it become something that was even a potential deliverable (the intro says it is not an agreed deliverable of the group)? going straight from "not a deliverable" to "publish this" seems a leap, to me...
17:16:53 [deane]
hear hear
17:16:55 [DanC]
DanC: well, whether a WG participant objects is up to that participant, right? I understand hsivonen to have objected, formally...
17:17:03 [DanC]
Doug: on behalf o Mozilla?
17:17:05 [DanC]
DanC: yes
17:17:12 [DanC]
HSivonen: as a developer
17:17:21 [Zakim]
17:17:30 [mattmay]
mattmay has joined #html-wg
17:17:55 [dsinger]
really concerned about having two specs and having to deal with contradictions, explain their relationship, and so on...what is the proposed publication status?
17:18:06 [Zakim]
17:18:11 [DanC]
(I understand Sam to have proposed status of WD)
17:18:43 [masinter]
17:18:46 [DanC]
Sam: hsivonen, pls elaborate on your objection?
17:19:26 [DanC]
hsivonen: having a normative specification built from a schema seems circular. [scribe doesn't think he got the gist of that]
17:20:12 [DanC]
(I should have sent mail... I wonder about publishing Mike's doc as a NOTE called "A schema-based description of HTML 5"; but I'm not sure I should muddy the waters now...)
17:20:45 [DanC]
Mike: it's currently in sync what, but that's not an essential constraint
17:20:53 [oedipus]
+1 to sam on moving on
17:20:56 [deane]
I believe that the W3C has been sending mixed messages to people about what the HTML5 spec is, and what's in scope, and this IMO is how the request arose for a "markup-spec". So, IMO there is no need for such a document, it contridicts the main spec.
17:20:57 [DanC]
q- masinter
17:21:01 [zcorpan]
circular as in bugs in hsivonen's schema become bugs in the spec if the spec is generated from the schema (which become non-bugs since by definition it is correct behavior)?
17:21:03 [DanC]
q- DanC
17:21:26 [DanC]
Topic: ISSUE-65: HTML 5 spec update after 10 June 2008
17:21:34 [hsivonen]
the schema becoming out of sync with would invoke my previous objection :-)
17:21:37 [DanC]
Sam: note proposal to publish
17:21:40 [pimpbot]
Title: ACTION-95, ISSUE-65: Plan to publish a new WD of HTML-5 from Chris Wilson on 2009-01-22 ( from January to March 2009) (at
17:21:48 [dsinger]
...thinks an informative documen might be useful, but a normative one bad...
17:21:52 [DanC]
Sam: any objections?
17:22:09 [deane]
I think Mike's work should be incorpororated into the main spec.
17:22:13 [DanC]
Topic: ISSUE-54 (doctype-legacy-compat)
17:22:23 [oedipus]
pointer to emessage please
17:22:27 [DanC]
Sam: we seem to have consensus around a recent proposal...
17:22:45 [DanC]
hsivonen: proposing 2 valid doctypes: <!DOCTYPES html>, as current, and ...
17:22:57 [zcorpan]
(also constraints hsivonen some day prefers to implement in java instead of schema become undefined in the spec if the spec is generated from the schema)
17:22:59 [Julian]
17:23:06 [DanC]
... <!DOCTYPES html system "about:sgml-compat">
17:23:10 [hsivonen]
<!DOCTYPE html> and <!DOCTYPE html SYSTEM "about:sgml-compat">
17:23:14 [DanC]
q+ to request registration about:
17:23:38 [oedipus]
+1 to hold off for a week
17:23:45 [DanC]
start of thread is
17:23:46 [pimpbot]
Title: ISSUE-54: doctype-legacy-compat from Sam Ruby on 2009-01-08 ( from January 2009) (at
17:23:48 [DanC]
-1 hold off for a week
17:23:51 [masinter]
+1 hold off, "about:" scheme is unregistered
17:23:51 [DanC]
ack Julian
17:24:15 [hober]
How about a tag: URI?
17:24:19 [hsivonen]
17:24:38 [DanC]
ack danc
17:24:38 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to request registration about:
17:24:57 [Julian]
Julian: the alternate doctype should be accepted as valid, otherwise there's no point in adding it.
17:25:01 [hober],2009-01:sgml-compat or some-such
17:25:14 [DanC]
DanC: I'm happy to consider this done provided someone volunteers to get about: registered as a URI scheme
17:25:26 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #html-wg
17:25:26 [DanC]
Masinter: that could be tricky... might need a registry of values
17:25:32 [gsnedders]
hober: That seems too long
17:25:36 [hsivonen]
hober, that date is dangerously close to a version number
17:25:45 [DanC]
action-91 due next week
17:25:45 [trackbot]
ACTION-91 Propose 'legacy-compat' and report on feedback due date now next week
17:25:46 [MikeSmith]
RRSAgent, make minutes
17:25:46 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate MikeSmith
17:25:54 [hober]
IIRC you need at least the year, so I guess s/-01// would work too
17:25:57 [DanC]
(er... trackbot???)
17:26:20 [DanC]
Topic: ISSUE-13 (handling-http-401-status)
17:26:25 [MikeSmith]
RRSAgent, make log public
17:26:30 [zcorpan]
putting a date in there means you have to google for it (because it's impossible to remember all magic dates in doctypes, namespaces, etc)
17:26:48 [DanC]
Masinter: I'd like us to review http [?]
17:26:52 [Julian]
17:27:00 [hsivonen]
17:27:17 [DanC]
... we talked about taking origin out... should we do that here?
17:27:19 [MikeSmith]
title: HTML WG weekly telcon
17:27:25 [MikeSmith]
chair: Sam Ruby
17:27:31 [DanC]
DanC: I gather Hickson took the 401 stuff out after some experimentation
17:27:37 [DanC]
Julian: yes, that text is gone...
17:27:39 [masinter]
thanks, that was my question
17:27:55 [DanC]
... I've been following Thomas Broyer's IETF ID; I gather a new draft is in progress
17:28:05 [alexf]
alexf has joined #html-wg
17:28:20 [DanC]
17:28:29 [DanC]
julain: what would a decision to postpone mean?
17:28:45 [DanC]
Sam: I'd move this back to RAISED if we don't have a concrete proposal
17:29:01 [MikeSmith]
17:29:55 [DanC]
DanC: when I proposed to postpone, I meant "not in HTML5", i.e. RESOLVED WONTFIX
17:30:17 [DanC]
Masinter: seems addressed elsewhere, to me
17:31:51 [DanC]
DanC: how does Thomas Broyer's proposal work? browser builder interest?
17:32:10 [DanC]
Julian: aside from a bug in opera, it doesn't require any browser builder changes
17:32:24 [DanC]
Julian: it introduces a 'cookie' auth scheme...
17:32:40 [Zakim]
17:32:58 [rubys]
I'd like to move on in a minute or two...
17:33:13 [rubys]
doesn't sound like the status is CLOSED or PENDING
17:33:20 [rubys]
17:33:32 [DanC]
(I can't seem to get Julain to tell me who is in the critical path for deployment. who changes from 200 to 4xx? webmasters? any big webmasters lined up to do this?)
17:33:34 [alexf]
alexf has left #html-wg
17:34:13 [DanC]
Sam: so we can move this back to RAISED until further work is available
17:34:31 [DanC]
action-86 due 1 June 2009
17:34:31 [trackbot]
ACTION-86 Review Thomas Broyer's IETF ID to see if we can postpone ISSUE-13 due date now 1 June 2009
17:34:44 [DanC]
Topic: issue-31 missing-alt
17:34:53 [MikeSmith]
RRSAgent, make minutes
17:34:53 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate MikeSmith
17:34:54 [pimpbot]
Title: SV_MEETING_TITLE -- 22 Jan 2009 (at
17:35:04 [DanC]
Matt: yes, the WAI coordination group met and decided to put something to draft a position... in a couple weeks
17:35:13 [Julian]
DanC, users of web servers would need to change their code to return 401/WWW-Authenticate: Cookie instead of 200.
17:35:21 [MikeSmith]
meeting: HTML WG weekly telcon
17:35:30 [DanC]
Sam: lacking a concrete proposal, let's move this issue to RAISED, OK?
17:36:03 [DanC]
ACTION-98 due 5 Feb 2009
17:36:03 [trackbot]
ACTION-98 Discuss missing-alt with the WAI CG and report back due date now 5 Feb 2009
17:36:07 [rubys]
change Issue-31 state to RAISED and move the date on action-98 out two weeks, any objections?
17:36:36 [DanC]
Zakim, mute me
17:36:36 [Zakim]
DanC should now be muted
17:37:02 [DanC]
17:37:03 [trackbot]
ACTION-93 -- Larry Masinter to make a proposal on doctypes and versioning -- due 2009-01-29 -- OPEN
17:37:03 [trackbot]
17:37:04 [pimpbot]
Title: ACTION-93 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at
17:37:23 [MikeSmith]
17:37:23 [trackbot]
ACTION-76 -- Chris Wilson to create poll on issue-32, based on Joshue's page from action-66 -- due 2009-01-31 -- OPEN
17:37:23 [trackbot]
17:37:25 [pimpbot]
Title: ACTION-76 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at
17:38:33 [gavin_]
gavin_ has joined #html-wg
17:38:38 [DanC]
Topic: ISSUE-37 (html-svg-mathml)
17:38:38 [DanC]
Doug: I expect progress today and next thu on ACTION-94 (
17:38:52 [DanC]
Doug: I've been experimenting with <img> vs <object>
17:39:01 [oedipus]
shepazu, i am intrigued by your philosophy and would like to subscribe to your newsletter
17:39:24 [DanC]
Topic: ISSUE-60 (html5-xhtml-namespace)
17:39:32 [DanC]
17:39:32 [trackbot]
ACTION-79 -- Sam Ruby to - send email to spark issue-60 -- due 2009-02-13 -- OPEN
17:39:32 [trackbot]
17:39:33 [pimpbot]
Title: ACTION-79 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at
17:39:42 [shepazu]
s/<img> vs <object>/<img> vs <object>, and <foreignObject>/
17:39:56 [DanC]
Sam: this is on my stack, but not high
17:40:03 [DanC]
LMM: why postpone?
17:40:12 [DanC]
Sam: if anybody wants it, fine by me...
17:40:16 [DanC]
LMM: OK, I'll take it
17:40:32 [oedipus]
shepazu, let me know if i can help by porting info to:
17:40:36 [pimpbot]
Title: PF/XTech/HTML5/MathMLinHTML5 - ESW Wiki (at
17:41:06 [DanC]
Topic: ISSUE-55 (head-profile)
17:41:07 [DanC]
17:41:18 [Julian]
17:41:22 [DanC]
17:41:22 [trackbot]
ACTION-75 -- Michael(tm) Smith to raise question to group about Yes, leave @profile out, No, re-add it -- and cite Hixie's summary of the discussion -- due 2009-02-19 -- OPEN
17:41:22 [trackbot]
17:41:23 [pimpbot]
Title: ACTION-75 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at
17:41:26 [DanC]
Mike: We don't seem to have consensus
17:41:29 [MikeSmith]
ack Julian
17:41:38 [DanC]
ack danc
17:42:09 [oedipus]
DanC: took this action because didn't think more discussion would change anyone's mind; that's why the action is important
17:42:18 [oedipus]
MS: don't think survey appropriate
17:42:24 [oedipus]
DC: don't do a survey, then
17:42:40 [oedipus]
MS: basing decisions on results of surveys is best
17:42:49 [oedipus]
DC: putting question to people should be done via email
17:42:58 [DanC]
17:43:04 [oedipus]
MS: sending email and trying to evaluate results of email discussion
17:43:44 [oedipus]
DC: choice of survey: informational and speak-now-or-forever-hold-your piece
17:44:01 [Joshue]
JOC: Well the proposed survey for the summary attribute is its last recourse for a stay of execution. Is it a waste of time?
17:44:04 [oedipus]
MS: speculate from examination so far, will have formal objections to removing @profile
17:44:29 [oedipus]
SR: will get worse than that - base of zero and what works on web
17:44:45 [oedipus]
DC: should withdraw this action because MikeSmith no longer a chair
17:44:57 [oedipus]
SR: second that
17:45:02 [DanC]
close action-75
17:45:02 [trackbot]
ACTION-75 Raise question to group about Yes, leave @profile out, No, re-add it -- and cite Hixie's summary of the discussion closed
17:45:08 [oedipus]
MS: happy to have action withdrawn;
17:45:23 [oedipus]
SR: could move to RAISED or POSTPONED
17:45:36 [oedipus]
DC: moving to POSTPONED is giving another week for email review
17:45:41 [oedipus]
SR: someone needs to take an action
17:45:48 [oedipus]
DC: how do you propose we move forward
17:46:23 [oedipus]
SR: issue raised; differing opinions as how to resolve; further discussion likely to be circular
17:46:29 [oedipus]
SR: anyone change their mind?
17:46:43 [rubys]
17:47:09 [oedipus]
SR: wary of action item with no one assigned to it
17:47:41 [oedipus]
MS: volunteer to review issue and come up with recommendation
17:47:50 [DanC]
LMM: I'm willing to review the issue and make a propsal in 2 weeks
17:48:09 [DanC]
oedipus, are you volunteering to clean up the minutes? if not, please stop
17:48:51 [DanC]
ACTION: masinter to review @profile due 2 weeks
17:48:51 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-99 - Review @profile due 2 weeks [on Larry Masinter - due 2009-01-29].
17:49:21 [oedipus]
i/DanC: took this action/ScribeNick: oedipus
17:49:21 [oedipus]
i/close action-75/ScribeNick: DanC
17:49:24 [oedipus]
i/DanC: took this action/ScribeNick: oedipus
17:49:24 [oedipus]
i/close action-75/ScribeNick: DanC
17:51:38 [DanC]
Topic: ISSUE-56 (urls-webarch):
17:52:20 [DanC]
DanC: the funding negotiation I've been doing with adobe about authoring materials is done, so this URI stuff might get a little lower proiority
17:52:27 [DanC]
LMM: I'm willing to help with the URI stuff
17:52:38 [DanC]
Topic: ISSUE-13 (handling-http-401-status)
17:52:42 [DanC]
LMM: [missed]
17:53:04 [DanC]
LMM: adam posted a link to the new IETF draft
17:53:49 [masinter]
17:53:51 [pimpbot]
Title: draft-abarth-origin-00 - The HTTP Origin Header (at
17:53:55 [DanC]
(I don't see Adam's msg)
17:53:56 [MikeSmith]
RRSAgent, make minutes
17:53:56 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate MikeSmith
17:53:57 [pimpbot]
Title: SV_MEETING_TITLE -- 22 Jan 2009 (at
17:54:00 [Zakim]
17:54:01 [Zakim]
17:54:01 [Zakim]
17:54:02 [Zakim]
17:54:03 [Zakim]
17:54:04 [Zakim]
17:54:04 [Zakim]
17:54:06 [MikeSmith]
Zakim, drop Mike
17:54:06 [Zakim]
Mike is being disconnected
17:54:07 [Zakim]
17:54:09 [Zakim]
17:54:11 [Zakim]
17:54:16 [DanC]
Sam: let's adjourn. I expect discussion on [chinese menu numbers]
17:54:24 [Zakim]
17:54:30 [dsinger]
17:54:40 [Joshue]
Joshue has left #html-wg
17:55:04 [DanC]
Sam, I think it's recording what you expect discussion on, with subject keywords, not just numbers... repeat, please?
17:55:41 [Julian]
issue-59, action-77
17:55:49 [Julian]
issue-54, action-81
17:56:01 [Julian]
17:56:05 [Julian]
as far as I recall
17:56:43 [DanC]
17:57:18 [DanC]
Sam: I expect discussion on ISSUE-59 (normative-language-reference), ISSUE-54 doctype-legacy-compat
17:59:46 [DanC]
Zakim, I hung up
17:59:46 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'I hung up', DanC
17:59:49 [DanC]
Zakim, drop me
17:59:49 [Zakim]
DanC is being disconnected
17:59:50 [Zakim]
HTML_WG()12:00PM has ended
17:59:51 [Zakim]
Attendees were Masinter, Julian, Sam, DanC, Matt_May, hsivonen, Shepazu, Gregory_Rosmaita, Cynthia_Shelly, adrianba, ChrisWilson, Shawn_Medero, Mike
18:00:23 [DanC]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:00:24 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate DanC
18:00:25 [pimpbot]
Title: HTML WG weekly telcon -- 22 Jan 2009 (at
18:00:46 [DanC]
smedero, now's the time to pitch in on minutes clean-up, if you're still interested
18:01:33 [smedero]
hrm, why didn't rrsagent grab Mike's fix ups on the chair...
18:02:05 [oedipus]
smedero, refresh the minutes -- sam is listed as chair
18:02:11 [oedipus]
pimpbot is a bit slow
18:02:13 [pimpbot]
oedipus: Huh?
18:02:18 [smedero]
there we go.
18:02:23 [smedero]
18:02:37 [oedipus]
no problem - you going to push the minutes?
18:02:52 [smedero]
scanning them now, but yes I will make them public
18:03:20 [smedero]
that's fine
18:03:25 [oedipus]
zakim, please part
18:03:25 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #html-wg
18:03:56 [smedero]
no problems
18:05:58 [oedipus]
i/MS: happy to have action/ScribeNick: oedipus
18:06:05 [oedipus]
i/LMM: I'm willing to review/ScribeNick: DanC
18:06:13 [oedipus]
rrsagent, please make minutes
18:06:13 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate oedipus
18:06:14 [pimpbot]
Title: HTML WG weekly telcon -- 22 Jan 2009 (at
18:06:21 [smedero]
yeah I just noticed that lengthy bit at the end.
18:07:25 [gsnedders]
oedipus: We've adjourned. It isn't anymore.
18:07:55 [oedipus]
gsnedders, RRSAgent is still logging because it is the only way non-staff can edit and tweak the minutes
18:09:20 [gsnedders]
rrsagent, please make minutes
18:09:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate gsnedders
18:09:21 [pimpbot]
Title: HTML WG weekly telcon -- 22 Jan 2009 (at
18:09:45 [smedero]
18:10:10 [smedero]
18:10:15 [Sander]
Sander has joined #html-wg
18:11:13 [smedero]
18:12:03 [deane]
deane has left #html-wg
18:12:14 [smedero]
rrsagent, please make minutes
18:12:14 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate smedero
18:12:15 [pimpbot]
Title: HTML WG weekly telcon -- 22 Jan 2009 (at
18:14:39 [smedero]
s/on behalf o Mozilla/on behalf of Mozilla/
18:14:53 [smedero]
rrsagent, please make minutes
18:14:53 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate smedero
18:14:54 [pimpbot]
Title: HTML WG weekly telcon -- 22 Jan 2009 (at
18:20:42 [hyatt]
hyatt has joined #html-wg
18:25:14 [smedero]
rrsagent, bye
18:25:14 [RRSAgent]
I see 1 open action item saved in :
18:25:14 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: masinter to review @profile due 2 weeks [1]
18:25:14 [RRSAgent]
recorded in