13:58:34 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/06/30-ldp-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/06/30-ldp-irc ←
13:58:36 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs public ←
13:58:38 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be LDP ←
13:58:38 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_LDP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_LDP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes ←
13:58:39 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
13:58:39 <trackbot> Date: 30 June 2014
13:59:27 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started ←
13:59:34 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
13:59:41 <codyburleson> Zakim, IPcaller is me.
Cody Burleson: Zakim, IPcaller is me. ←
13:59:41 <Zakim> +codyburleson; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +codyburleson; got it ←
13:59:44 <Zakim> +??P5
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P5 ←
13:59:53 <nmihindu> Zakim, ??P5 is me
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, ??P5 is me ←
13:59:54 <Zakim> +nmihindu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +nmihindu; got it ←
13:59:59 <nmihindu> Zakim, mute me
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, mute me ←
13:59:59 <Zakim> nmihindu should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: nmihindu should now be muted ←
14:00:03 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:00:14 <Arnaud> zakim, IPcaller is me
Arnaud Le Hors: zakim, IPcaller is me ←
14:00:16 <Zakim> +Arnaud; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Arnaud; got it ←
14:00:44 <SteveS> I’m only on IRC today
Steve Speicher: I’m only on IRC today ←
14:01:07 <Arnaud> how are you going to scribe?
Arnaud Le Hors: how are you going to scribe? ←
14:01:24 <SteveS> I’ll just make it up
Steve Speicher: I’ll just make it up ←
14:01:31 <Arnaud> zakim, who's on the phone?
Arnaud Le Hors: zakim, who's on the phone? ←
14:01:31 <Zakim> On the phone I see codyburleson, nmihindu (muted), Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see codyburleson, nmihindu (muted), Arnaud ←
14:01:34 <nmihindu> scribenick: nmihindu
(Scribe set to Nandana Mihindukulasooriya)
<nmihindu> regrets: steves, johnarwe, sergio
<nmihindu> chair: Arnaud
<nmihindu> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2014.06.30
14:01:35 <SteveS> Arnaud: praises Steve
Arnaud Le Hors: praises Steve [ Scribe Assist by Steve Speicher ] ←
14:02:26 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ashok_Malhotra ←
14:02:27 <Zakim> +bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: +bblfish ←
14:02:45 <Zakim> +??P10
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P10 ←
14:02:54 <deiu> Zakim, ??P10 is me
Andrei Sambra: Zakim, ??P10 is me ←
14:02:54 <Zakim> +deiu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +deiu; got it ←
14:02:58 <bblfish> hi
Henry Story: hi ←
14:02:59 <deiu> Zakim, mute me please
Andrei Sambra: Zakim, mute me please ←
14:03:00 <Zakim> deiu should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: deiu should now be muted ←
14:03:01 <deiu> Hi
Andrei Sambra: Hi ←
14:03:10 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
14:03:56 <nmihindu> he sent regrets I think
he sent regrets I think ←
14:04:15 <Zakim> +ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: +ericP ←
14:05:15 <nmihindu> Topic: Admin
14:05:19 <nmihindu> Approval of Minutes of the 23 June telecon
Approval of Minutes of the 23 June telecon ←
14:05:24 <nmihindu> http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2014-06-23
http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2014-06-23 ←
14:05:46 <Zakim> +??P14
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P14 ←
14:05:51 <pchampin> zakim, ??P14 is me
Pierre-Antoine Champin: zakim, ??P14 is me ←
14:05:51 <Zakim> +pchampin; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pchampin; got it ←
14:06:05 <nmihindu> Arnaud: any objections ?
Arnaud Le Hors: any objections ? ←
14:06:14 <nmihindu> resolved: Minutes of 23 June approved without objection
RESOLVED: Minutes of 23 June approved without objection ←
14:07:05 <nmihindu> Arnaud: next meeting will be on July 07th
Arnaud Le Hors: next meeting will be on July 07th ←
14:07:10 <nmihindu> Topic: Actions and Issues
14:07:30 <nmihindu> Arnaud: actions to declare victory ?
Arnaud Le Hors: actions to declare victory ? ←
14:07:39 <nmihindu> ... no actions to report
... no actions to report ←
14:07:43 <nmihindu> Topic: Paging spec
14:08:19 <nmihindu> Arnaud: summarizing the status of the paging spec
Arnaud Le Hors: summarizing the status of the paging spec ←
14:08:36 <nmihindu> ... there are two items we need to confirm
... there are two items we need to confirm ←
14:08:50 <nmihindu> ... 1. Confirm MUST in section 4.1.1
... 1. Confirm MUST in section 4.1.1 ←
14:09:12 <Arnaud> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/default/ldp-paging.html#general
Arnaud Le Hors: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/default/ldp-paging.html#general ←
14:10:01 <nmihindu> ... do we agree, LDP Paging clients MUST be paging-aware ?
... do we agree, LDP Paging clients MUST be paging-aware ? ←
14:10:24 <nmihindu> Sandro: we can remove it, it is not a MUST, it is a definition
Sandro Hawke: we can remove it, it is not a MUST, it is a definition ←
14:10:45 <nmihindu> ... the real question is whether the LDP clients should be LDP Paging clients also
... the real question is whether the LDP clients should be LDP Paging clients also ←
14:11:04 <SteveS> We have that marked at risk https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/default/ldp.html#atrisk-paging
Steve Speicher: We have that marked at risk https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/default/ldp.html#atrisk-paging ←
14:11:19 <nmihindu> ... was it in the spec that all LDP clients should be paging aware ?
... was it in the spec that all LDP clients should be paging aware ? ←
14:11:30 <nmihindu> Arnaud: I think it was
Arnaud Le Hors: I think it was ←
14:12:41 <nmihindu> Sandro: Shall we continue or not? we need JohnArwe and SteveS on the call
Sandro Hawke: Shall we continue or not? we need JohnArwe and SteveS on the call ←
14:13:19 <nmihindu> Arnaud: It is also good to have the opinion of the rest of the group
Arnaud Le Hors: It is also good to have the opinion of the rest of the group ←
14:13:23 <bblfish> I have not implemented paging yet, partly also because I have been busy doing other thigns. Am getting some time again to program, perhaps even client side.
Henry Story: I have not implemented paging yet, partly also because I have been busy doing other thigns. Am getting some time again to program, perhaps even client side. ←
14:14:29 <nmihindu> Ashok: the 5 kinds of clients are descriptive ?
Ashok Malhotra: the 5 kinds of clients are descriptive ? ←
14:14:30 <codyburleson> We have not implemented paging yet because we're still working on other aspects of implementation. We're limited in bandwidth, so just trying to stay as up-to-date as possible with what we hear.
Cody Burleson: We have not implemented paging yet because we're still working on other aspects of implementation. We're limited in bandwidth, so just trying to stay as up-to-date as possible with what we hear. ←
14:14:56 <nmihindu> sandro: yes, I don't see much value in making them nominative
Sandro Hawke: yes, I don't see much value in making them nominative ←
14:15:08 <SteveS> I think it is fine to remove the at risk text about warning LDP clients about server-initiated paging. To me, it would seem possible that we could have LDP PAGING clients that would be expected to handle paging responses
Steve Speicher: I think it is fine to remove the at risk text about warning LDP clients about server-initiated paging. To me, it would seem possible that we could have LDP PAGING clients that would be expected to handle paging responses ←
14:15:33 <nmihindu> ... what matters is what the servers no about the clients
... what matters is what the servers no about the clients ←
14:15:59 <nmihindu> \s\no\know
\s\no\know ←
14:17:27 <nmihindu> Arnaud: we have a feature at risk that says LDP clients should handle paging
Arnaud Le Hors: we have a feature at risk that says LDP clients should handle paging ←
14:17:45 <SteveS> If I had to prioritize where my own exploration and adoption would be: 1. patch 2. paging . Though there isn’t a big gap in the priorities
Steve Speicher: If I had to prioritize where my own exploration and adoption would be: 1. patch 2. paging . Though there isn’t a big gap in the priorities ←
14:18:06 <nmihindu> sandro: if we finish the paging spec, it is not a feature at risk anymore
Sandro Hawke: if we finish the paging spec, it is not a feature at risk anymore ←
14:18:24 <nmihindu> ,.. but SHOULD vs MUST, we don't want make paging a MUST
,.. but SHOULD vs MUST, we don't want make paging a MUST ←
14:18:50 <Arnaud> http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-ldp-20140619/#h5_ldpr-cli-hints-ignorable
Arnaud Le Hors: http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-ldp-20140619/#h5_ldpr-cli-hints-ignorable ←
14:18:54 <nmihindu> Ashok: we can only do paging with clients support paging, isn't it ?
Ashok Malhotra: we can only do paging with clients support paging, isn't it ? ←
14:19:39 <nmihindu> sandro: the clients that can't handle might loose some information in the case of paging
Sandro Hawke: the clients that can't handle might loose some information in the case of paging ←
14:19:42 <Zakim> -Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Arnaud ←
14:19:46 <Arnaud> shoot
Arnaud Le Hors: shoot ←
14:19:47 <sandro> PROPOSED: LDP servers MUST NOT initiate paging unless the client has indicated it understands paging (such as via the Prefer page-size header)
PROPOSED: LDP servers MUST NOT initiate paging unless the client has indicated it understands paging (such as via the Prefer page-size header) ←
14:20:24 <deiu> +1
Andrei Sambra: +1 ←
14:20:24 <codyburleson> +1
Cody Burleson: +1 ←
14:20:26 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:20:28 <nmihindu> +1
+1 ←
14:20:29 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
14:20:35 <Arnaud> zakim, IPcaller is me
Arnaud Le Hors: zakim, IPcaller is me ←
14:20:35 <Zakim> +Arnaud; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Arnaud; got it ←
14:21:03 <pchampin> +1
14:21:07 <MiguelAraCo> +0
Miguel Aragón: +0 ←
14:21:09 <sandro> RESOLVED: LDP servers MUST NOT initiate paging unless the client has indicated it understands paging (such as via the Prefer page-size header)
RESOLVED: LDP servers MUST NOT initiate paging unless the client has indicated it understands paging (such as via the Prefer page-size header) ←
14:21:20 <bblfish> sounds reasonable
Henry Story: sounds reasonable ←
14:21:52 <SteveS> -0.2 as feels like it should be a SHOULD NOT and not a MUST NOT.
Steve Speicher: -0.2 as feels like it should be a SHOULD NOT and not a MUST NOT. ←
14:22:07 <nmihindu> Arnaud: section 4.1.1 doesn't give much information, it is an obvious point
Arnaud Le Hors: section 4.1.1 doesn't give much information, it is an obvious point ←
14:22:42 <nmihindu> Ashok: should we replace 4.1.1 with the statement that was resolved ?
Ashok Malhotra: should we replace 4.1.1 with the statement that was resolved ? ←
14:23:11 <nmihindu> Arnaud: we could decide it drop it or confirm it JohnArwe
Arnaud Le Hors: we could decide it drop it or confirm it JohnArwe ←
14:23:43 <nmihindu> sandro: it seems editorial not normative. we can leave it to the editors
Sandro Hawke: it seems editorial not normative. we can leave it to the editors ←
14:24:16 <sandro> PROPOSED: replace 4.1.1 with a statement that clients which send Prefer page-size MUST act the same whether servers initiate paging or not.
PROPOSED: replace 4.1.1 with a statement that clients which send Prefer page-size MUST act the same whether servers initiate paging or not. ←
14:24:22 <nmihindu> Arnaud: Asok has a point. there is a correlation with 4.1.1 and what was proposed.
Arnaud Le Hors: Asok has a point. there is a correlation with 4.1.1 and what was proposed. ←
14:25:03 <sandro> sandro: maybe going to far, they must handle it in a way which doesn't cause upstream/user problems
Sandro Hawke: maybe going to far, they must handle it in a way which doesn't cause upstream/user problems [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:25:23 <sandro> PROPOSED: replace 4.1.1 with a statement that clients which send Prefer page-size MUST act properly, without causing upstream/user problems, if a server decides to initiate paging.
PROPOSED: replace 4.1.1 with a statement that clients which send Prefer page-size MUST act properly, without causing upstream/user problems, if a server decides to initiate paging. ←
14:25:47 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
14:25:59 <sandro> sandro: not wording exact
Sandro Hawke: not wording exact [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:26:27 <nmihindu> pchampin: MUST act properly might be a bit vaue
Pierre-Antoine Champin: MUST act properly might be a bit vague ←
14:26:29 <ericP> propose: s/act properly/not freak out about/
Eric Prud'hommeaux: propose: s/act properly/not freak out about/ ←
14:26:59 <nmihindu> s/vaue/vague
14:27:05 <sandro> PROPOSED: replace 4.1.1 with a statement that clients which send Prefer page-size MUST not break (eg must not cause upsteam/user problems) if a server decides to initiate paging.
PROPOSED: replace 4.1.1 with a statement that clients which send Prefer page-size MUST not break (eg must not cause upsteam/user problems) if a server decides to initiate paging. ←
14:27:40 <SteveS> +1 I think it is improvement, editors will get intent and edit as needed
Steve Speicher: +1 I think it is improvement, editors will get intent and edit as needed ←
14:27:45 <sandro> PROPOSED: replace 4.1.1 with a statement that clients which send Prefer page-size MUST conform to the other rules of this spec
PROPOSED: replace 4.1.1 with a statement that clients which send Prefer page-size MUST conform to the other rules of this spec ←
14:27:59 <sandro> (general agreement of intent)
Sandro Hawke: (general agreement of intent) ←
14:28:30 <sandro> Arnaud: don't need a resolution; this should give John enough to chew on
Arnaud Le Hors: don't need a resolution; this should give John enough to chew on [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:28:42 <sandro> https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Names_in_Paging
Sandro Hawke: https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Names_in_Paging ←
14:28:47 <nmihindu> Arnaud: the next thing to discuss was about the naming
Arnaud Le Hors: the next thing to discuss was about the naming ←
14:29:01 <SteveS> If server can’t satisfy the request, what status code should be given? I see impls use 403 (Forbidden)
Steve Speicher: If server can’t satisfy the request, what status code should be given? I see impls use 403 (Forbidden) ←
14:29:16 <sandro> SteveS, do you "superset resource" as the companion to "subset resource" ?
Sandro Hawke: SteveS, do you "superset resource" as the companion to "subset resource" ? ←
14:29:40 <nmihindu> Arnaud: only sandro, JohnArwe, and SteveS has added their preferences
Arnaud Le Hors: only sandro, JohnArwe, and SteveS has added their preferences ←
14:29:43 <sandro> SteveS, by HTTP, servers are allowed to silently ignore Prefer headers. So I'd say no error.
Sandro Hawke: SteveS, by HTTP, servers are allowed to silently ignore Prefer headers. So I'd say no error. ←
14:30:22 <nmihindu> sandro: the term paged resource doesn't match with the rest
Sandro Hawke: the term paged resource doesn't match with the rest ←
14:30:41 <SteveS> sandro, could be superset, or someway I was thinking of “inclusion resource” but didn’t sound right
Steve Speicher: sandro, could be superset, or someway I was thinking of “inclusion resource” but didn’t sound right ←
14:30:55 <codyburleson> Does single-page resource mean a single resource within a page?
Cody Burleson: Does single-page resource mean a single resource within a page? ←
14:30:55 <nmihindu> Arnaud: sandro, what's your favourite at the moment ?
Arnaud Le Hors: sandro, what's your favourite at the moment ? ←
14:32:15 <Ashok> q+
Ashok Malhotra: q+ ←
14:32:16 <SteveS> sandro, so if an HTTP server gets a Prefer header that is doesn’t syntactically validate…would it ignore it? use some fallback logic? or fail the request? I think all would be acceptable, so I don’t think HTTP says that you can’t give an error on an optional piece
Steve Speicher: sandro, so if an HTTP server gets a Prefer header that is doesn’t syntactically validate…would it ignore it? use some fallback logic? or fail the request? I think all would be acceptable, so I don’t think HTTP says that you can’t give an error on an optional piece ←
14:32:23 <nmihindu> sandro: in the initial post, in-sequence resource
Sandro Hawke: in the initial post, in-sequence resource ←
14:33:06 <bblfish> subset and superset make sense
Henry Story: subset and superset make sense ←
14:33:29 <bblfish> subset does not usually contain the notion of order
Henry Story: subset does not usually contain the notion of order ←
14:33:57 <SteveS> “ordered subset” can fix that
Steve Speicher: “ordered subset” can fix that ←
14:34:23 <bblfish> true
Henry Story: true ←
14:35:50 <Arnaud> ack ashok
Arnaud Le Hors: ack ashok ←
14:35:51 <nmihindu> ericP: are we talking about pageable resources ?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: are we talking about pageable resources ? ←
14:36:48 <nmihindu> Ashok: what we have by default is ok. I don't think people will get confused with page
Ashok Malhotra: what we have by default is ok. I don't think people will get confused with page ←
14:37:30 <nmihindu> Arnaud: if we use ldp:Page it might not be ambiguous
Arnaud Le Hors: if we use ldp:Page it might not be ambiguous ←
14:37:43 <sandro> sandro: it has to be ldp:PagingPage
Sandro Hawke: it has to be ldp:PagingPage [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:37:45 <nmihindu> sandro: LDPPagingPage ;) ?
Sandro Hawke: LDPPagingPage ;) ? ←
14:38:31 <nmihindu> Arnaud: we used the generic terms in the LDP spec with ldp namespace such as resource
Arnaud Le Hors: we used the generic terms in the LDP spec with ldp namespace such as resource ←
14:38:59 <codyburleson> "sequential part"
Cody Burleson: "sequential part" ←
14:39:04 <bblfish> what about Iterated
Henry Story: what about Iterated ←
14:39:12 <bblfish> an Iterated Page
Henry Story: an Iterated Page ←
14:39:23 <bblfish> sequenced Page is better
Henry Story: sequenced Page is better ←
14:39:26 <nmihindu> sandro: Single Page resource is a confusing term
Sandro Hawke: Single Page resource is a confusing term ←
14:40:02 <nmihindu> Ashok: do you agree with what we have today ?
Ashok Malhotra: do you agree with what we have today ? ←
14:40:14 <nmihindu> sandro: I vote will be -.7
Sandro Hawke: my vote will be -.7 ←
14:40:36 <nmihindu> s/I/my
14:40:42 <ericP> -1 to forward-thinking clarity
Eric Prud'hommeaux: -1 to forward-thinking clarity ←
14:40:48 <Arnaud> strawpoll: would you prefer keeping what we have or use some other names?
STRAWPOLL: would you prefer keeping what we have or use some other names? ←
14:41:04 <sandro> +1 "single page resource" is pretty bad
Sandro Hawke: +1 "single page resource" is pretty bad ←
14:41:12 <ericP> prefer another name
Eric Prud'hommeaux: prefer another name ←
14:41:19 <deiu> +1 ericP
Andrei Sambra: +1 ericP ←
14:42:01 <ericP> does anyone here know if Atom has something to offer?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: does anyone here know if Atom has something to offer? ←
14:42:12 <SteveS> +1 a better name
Steve Speicher: +1 a better name ←
14:42:20 <nmihindu> Arnaud: paging is worth keeping, we shouldn't ditch it because of the naming
Arnaud Le Hors: paging is worth keeping, we shouldn't ditch it because of the naming ←
14:42:29 <sandro> Maybe "Subset page resource" or "In-Sequence page resource"
Sandro Hawke: Maybe "Subset page resource" or "In-Sequence page resource" ←
14:42:31 <bblfish> multi page resource
Henry Story: multi page resource ←
14:42:33 <SteveS> I see better options on the wiki page
Steve Speicher: I see better options on the wiki page ←
14:42:39 <codyburleson> One page in a sequence can also be called a "pagination".
Cody Burleson: One page in a sequence can also be called a "pagination". ←
14:43:15 <nmihindu> Arnaud: paging resource ?
Arnaud Le Hors: paging resource ? ←
14:43:34 <pchampin> I think I like "in-sequence page resource"
Pierre-Antoine Champin: I think I like "in-sequence page resource" ←
14:43:43 <deiu> me too
Andrei Sambra: me too ←
14:43:55 <codyburleson> ORIGIN mid 19th cent.: noun of action from paginate,
Cody Burleson: ORIGIN mid 19th cent.: noun of action from paginate, ←
14:44:05 <nmihindu> sandro: in-sequence resource might be the better option
Sandro Hawke: in-sequence resource might be the better option ←
14:44:36 <sandro> PROPOSED: replace "Single Page Resource" with "In-Sequence Page Resource", which is still loosely "page"
PROPOSED: replace "Single Page Resource" with "In-Sequence Page Resource", which is still loosely "page" ←
14:44:43 <SteveS> maybe “Page resource” is an ordered subset and “Superset resource” is the thiing that is being paged
Steve Speicher: maybe “Page resource” is an ordered subset and “Superset resource” is the thiing that is being paged ←
14:45:34 <nmihindu> bblfish: I think squence is better than set
Henry Story: I think squence is better than set ←
14:46:08 <Ashok> o
Ashok Malhotra: o ←
14:46:32 <sandro> +1 best we've got
Sandro Hawke: +1 best we've got ←
14:46:39 <codyburleson> +1 (I think it's better. Klugy maybe. But better)
Cody Burleson: +1 (I think it's better. Klugy maybe. But better) ←
14:46:41 <SteveS> I don’t think the proposal fixes much but not sure I care that much
Steve Speicher: I don’t think the proposal fixes much but not sure I care that much ←
14:46:46 <nmihindu> 0
0 ←
14:46:55 <deiu> +1
Andrei Sambra: +1 ←
14:47:09 <pchampin> +1
14:47:10 <SteveS> -1+1=0
Steve Speicher: -1+1=0 ←
14:47:31 <sandro> RESOLVED: replace "Single Page Resource" with "In-Sequence Page Resource", which is still loosely "page"
RESOLVED: replace "Single Page Resource" with "In-Sequence Page Resource", which is still loosely "page" ←
14:47:35 <nmihindu> bblfish: what is the meaning of "In-Sequence"
Henry Story: what is the meaning of "In-Sequence" ←
14:47:53 <nmihindu> sandro: basically resources with previous/next links
Sandro Hawke: basically resources with previous/next links ←
14:48:43 <nmihindu> Arnaud: we will send the Paging spec soon for LC, it is better to review in the coming week
Arnaud Le Hors: we will send the Paging spec soon for LC, it is better to review in the coming week ←
14:49:06 <nmihindu> sandro: better review it for the technical content, there might be more editorial changes
Sandro Hawke: better review it for the technical content, there might be more editorial changes ←
14:49:40 <nmihindu> Arnaud: any news on the extension for the working group ?
Arnaud Le Hors: any news on the extension for the working group ? ←
14:49:52 <nmihindu> sandro: yes, we got it.
Sandro Hawke: yes, we got it. ←
14:50:00 <nmihindu> Topic: Status update
14:50:10 <nmihindu> subtopic: Primer
14:50:26 <nmihindu> Arnaud: FPWD is published
Arnaud Le Hors: FPWD is published ←
14:50:34 <nmihindu> subtopic: LDP spec
14:50:53 <nmihindu> SteveS published an implementation report
SteveS published an implementation report ←
14:51:17 <nmihindu> subTopic: Test Suite
14:51:55 <nmihindu> there are several new tests have been proposed
there are several new tests have been proposed ←
14:52:07 <nmihindu> we need at least one more member from the WG to get them approved
we need at least one more member from the WG to get them approved ←
14:52:08 <codyburleson> We're using the test suite.
Cody Burleson: We're using the test suite. ←
14:52:18 <codyburleson> But only just got started with it.
Cody Burleson: But only just got started with it. ←
14:52:44 <nmihindu> we are using the test suite on LDP4j and will submit the implementation report in coming weeeks
we are using the test suite on LDP4j and will submit the implementation report in coming weeeks ←
14:53:10 <SteveS> There are no other testsuite updates pending, other than that unimplemented test cases I highlighted in email
Steve Speicher: There are no other testsuite updates pending, other than that unimplemented test cases I highlighted in email ←
14:53:27 <nmihindu> subtopic: Access Control
14:53:40 <nmihindu> Arnaud: any news from TallTed ?
Arnaud Le Hors: any news from TallTed ? ←
14:54:19 <nmihindu> Ashok: TallTed has added some content but I am not sure whether he is finished
Ashok Malhotra: TallTed has added some content but I am not sure whether he is finished ←
14:54:55 <nmihindu> bblfish: is it ReSpeced in the repo yet?
Henry Story: is it ReSpeced in the repo yet? ←
14:55:17 <nmihindu> Arnaud: we have been waiting for TallTed to finish to do that
Arnaud Le Hors: we have been waiting for TallTed to finish to do that ←
14:56:03 <Ashok> Henry, what's the helpful tool?
Ashok Malhotra: Henry, what's the helpful tool? ←
14:56:36 <nmihindu> Arnaud: shall we move forward without the review?
Arnaud Le Hors: shall we move forward without the review? ←
14:57:03 <nmihindu> sandro: we can wait for 2 days
Sandro Hawke: we can wait for 2 days ←
14:57:16 <bblfish> makes sense
Henry Story: makes sense ←
14:57:57 <bblfish> https://www.atlassian.com/software/sourcetree/overview
Henry Story: https://www.atlassian.com/software/sourcetree/overview ←
14:58:47 <nmihindu> Arnaud: Ashok please remind TallTed about the review
Arnaud Le Hors: Ashok please remind TallTed about the review ←
14:59:13 <nmihindu> subtopic: Best Practices & Guidelines
14:59:39 <nmihindu> Arnaud: what is the status of the canonical URL issue ?
Arnaud Le Hors: what is the status of the canonical URL issue ? ←
15:00:36 <nmihindu> codyburleson: I was expecting to get the WG opinion but the discussions didn't go anywhere
Cody Burleson: I was expecting to get the WG opinion but the discussions didn't go anywhere ←
15:00:57 <bblfish> I saw the thread but did not read the whole of it.
Henry Story: I saw the thread but did not read nearly any of it. ←
15:01:14 <nmihindu> Arnaud: we agreed to drop the term last week, shall we drop it and move forward ?
Arnaud Le Hors: we agreed to drop the term last week, shall we drop it and move forward ? ←
15:01:17 <bblfish> s/the whole of it/nearly any of it/
15:01:23 <bblfish> (was travelling)
Henry Story: (was travelling) ←
15:01:48 <nmihindu> Arnaud: I suggest to use primary and move forward
Arnaud Le Hors: I suggest to use primary and move forward ←
15:02:03 <deiu> Bye bye
Andrei Sambra: Bye bye ←
15:02:03 <Zakim> -codyburleson
Zakim IRC Bot: -codyburleson ←
15:02:05 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
15:02:06 <Zakim> -bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: -bblfish ←
15:02:08 <Zakim> -nmihindu
Zakim IRC Bot: -nmihindu ←
15:02:11 <Zakim> -Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Arnaud ←
15:02:23 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ashok_Malhotra ←
15:02:25 <Zakim> -ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: -ericP ←
15:02:54 <Zakim> -deiu
Zakim IRC Bot: -deiu ←
15:35:01 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, pchampin, in SW_LDP()10:00AM
(No events recorded for 32 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: disconnecting the lone participant, pchampin, in SW_LDP()10:00AM ←
15:35:03 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended ←
15:35:03 <Zakim> Attendees were codyburleson, nmihindu, Arnaud, Ashok_Malhotra, bblfish, deiu, Sandro, ericP, pchampin
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were codyburleson, nmihindu, Arnaud, Ashok_Malhotra, bblfish, deiu, Sandro, ericP, pchampin ←
<nmihindu> present: codyburleson, nmihindu, Arnaud, Ashok_Malhotra, bblfish, deiu, Sandro, ericP, pchampin
Formatted by CommonScribe