13:41:51 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-xhtml-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-xhtml-irc ←
13:42:32 <rmerric> topic http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Mar/0056.html
Roland Merrick: topic http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Mar/0056.html ←
13:42:46 <rmerric> rmerric has changed the topic to: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Mar/0056.html
Roland Merrick: rmerric has changed the topic to: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Mar/0056.html ←
13:43:12 <Roland> Zakim, this will be XHTML2
Roland Merrick: Zakim, this will be XHTML2 ←
13:43:12 <Zakim> ok, Roland, I see IA_XHTML2()9:45AM already started
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Roland, I see IA_XHTML2()9:45AM already started ←
13:43:31 <Roland> Zakim, list
Roland Merrick: Zakim, list ←
13:43:31 <Zakim> I see IA_XHTML2()9:45AM, Team_W3M()8:00AM, WAI_ERTWG()9:30AM active
Zakim IRC Bot: I see IA_XHTML2()9:45AM, Team_W3M()8:00AM, WAI_ERTWG()9:30AM active ←
13:43:33 <Zakim> also scheduled at this time is I18N_TS()9:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: also scheduled at this time is I18N_TS()9:00AM ←
13:44:46 <Roland> Zakim, who is here
Roland Merrick: Zakim, who is here ←
13:44:46 <Zakim> Roland, you need to end that query with '?'
Zakim IRC Bot: Roland, you need to end that query with '?' ←
13:44:56 <Roland> Zakim, who is here?
Roland Merrick: Zakim, who is here? ←
13:44:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see +0138687aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see +0138687aaaa ←
13:44:57 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, Roland, oedipus, Lachy, ShaneM_, krijn
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, Roland, oedipus, Lachy, ShaneM_, krijn ←
13:45:12 <Roland> Zakim, aaaa is Roland
Roland Merrick: Zakim, aaaa is Roland ←
13:45:12 <Zakim> +Roland; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Roland; got it ←
13:45:25 <Roland> Zakim, who is here?
Roland Merrick: Zakim, who is here? ←
13:45:25 <Zakim> On the phone I see Roland
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Roland ←
13:45:26 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, Roland, oedipus, Lachy, krijn
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, Roland, oedipus, Lachy, krijn ←
13:46:09 <ShaneM> note that I will be a few minutes late - child conflict this AM
Shane McCarron: note that I will be a few minutes late - child conflict this AM ←
13:47:01 <Steven> zakim, who is here?
Steven Pemberton: zakim, who is here? ←
13:47:01 <Zakim> On the phone I see Roland
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Roland ←
13:47:02 <Zakim> On IRC I see Steven, markbirbeck, ShaneM, RRSAgent, Zakim, Roland, oedipus, Lachy, krijn
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see Steven, markbirbeck, ShaneM, RRSAgent, Zakim, Roland, oedipus, Lachy, krijn ←
13:47:15 <Steven> zakim, dial steven-617
Steven Pemberton: zakim, dial steven-617 ←
13:47:15 <Zakim> ok, Steven; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Steven; the call is being made ←
13:47:15 <Roland> Meeting: XHTML2 WG Weekly Teleconference
13:47:16 <Zakim> +Steven
Zakim IRC Bot: +Steven ←
13:47:24 <Roland> Chair: Roland
13:47:42 <Roland> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Mar/0056.html
13:47:50 <Steven> Regrets: Tina, Yam
13:48:58 <markbirbeck> zakim, code?
Mark Birbeck: zakim, code? ←
13:48:58 <Zakim> the conference code is 94865 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 94865 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck ←
13:49:15 <Zakim> +Gregory_Rosmaita
Zakim IRC Bot: +Gregory_Rosmaita ←
13:49:28 <Zakim> + +0208761aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +0208761aabb ←
13:49:34 <markbirbeck> zakim i am aabb
Mark Birbeck: zakim i am aabb ←
13:49:42 <markbirbeck> zakim, i am aabb
Mark Birbeck: zakim, i am aabb ←
13:49:42 <Zakim> +markbirbeck; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +markbirbeck; got it ←
13:51:10 <Steven> -> http://www.w3.org/2008/03/19-xhtml-minutes Previous
Steven Pemberton: -> http://www.w3.org/2008/03/19-xhtml-minutes Previous ←
13:53:25 <oedipus> regrets+ Alessio
Gregory Rosmaita: regrets+ Alessio ←
13:56:51 <oedipus> scribe: Gregory_Rosmaita
(Scribe set to Gregory Rosmaita)
13:56:59 <oedipus> scribeNick: oedipus
13:57:14 <oedipus> TOPIC: CSS Namespace
13:57:42 <oedipus> SP: we asked for 3 things: drop it or deprecate it or point it out in the spec that this is a change in CSS and this is how you avoid problems;
Steven Pemberton: we asked for 3 things: drop it or deprecate it or point it out in the spec that this is a change in CSS and this is how you avoid problems; ←
13:58:11 <oedipus> SP: said will ignore comments -- replied to that: asked if refusing to merely pointing out in spec ok
Steven Pemberton: said will ignore comments -- replied to that: asked if refusing to merely pointing out in spec ok ←
13:58:29 <oedipus> SP: accept disapproval or get an answer, but if no, have to document before CR
Steven Pemberton: accept disapproval or get an answer, but if no, have to document before CR ←
13:59:09 <oedipus> SP: this has a 1 week heartbeat, so if they accept to point out in spc, we are ok; need to deciide what to do if don't accept any part of our comments?
Steven Pemberton: this has a 1 week heartbeat, so if they accept to point out in spc, we are ok; need to deciide what to do if don't accept any part of our comments? ←
13:59:22 <oedipus> SP: object or accept the fact they rejected our comments/suggestion
Steven Pemberton: object or accept the fact they rejected our comments/suggestion ←
13:59:53 <oedipus> SP: don't think much to ask to ask them at the minimum to point out that this is a change in CSS; if don't should say not sufficient, as it is a change in CSS
Steven Pemberton: don't think much to ask to ask them at the minimum to point out that this is a change in CSS; if don't should say not sufficient, as it is a change in CSS ←
13:59:59 <oedipus> RM: inclined to agree
Roland Merrick: inclined to agree ←
14:00:32 <oedipus> SP: not much to ask -- don't have to change implementations -- is WG ok with us saying that the least we want them to do is point it out in spec?
Steven Pemberton: not much to ask -- don't have to change implementations -- is WG ok with us saying that the least we want them to do is point it out in spec? ←
14:01:04 <oedipus> RESOLVED: CSS NS must at least point out that there is change in CSS
RESOLVED: CSS NS must at least point out that there is change in CSS ←
14:01:15 <oedipus> TOPIC: XHTML M12n
14:01:51 <oedipus> SP: waiting on Shane to make a new iteration of draft; he's done that, so i'm emailing steve bratt and going throough points and pointing to new spec and asking if ok with transition
Steven Pemberton: waiting on Shane to make a new iteration of draft; he's done that, so i'm emailing steve bratt and going throough points and pointing to new spec and asking if ok with transition ←
14:01:57 <oedipus> RM: just going through process
Roland Merrick: just going through process ←
14:02:15 <oedipus> ACTION: StevenP - point SteveB to new wording in M12n
ACTION: StevenP - point SteveB to new wording in M12n ←
14:02:34 <oedipus> SP: "would you have a look at the new/latest version of the report"
Steven Pemberton: "would you have a look at the new/latest version of the report" ←
14:02:46 <Steven> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/xhtml-basic-11-implementation.html
Steven Pemberton: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/xhtml-basic-11-implementation.html ←
14:03:12 <oedipus> SP: at bottom, there is a pointer to Yam's response and test report
Steven Pemberton: at bottom, there is a pointer to Yam's response and test report ←
14:03:46 <oedipus> [please stand by -- we are temporarily experiencing technical difficulties]
[please stand by -- we are temporarily experiencing technical difficulties] ←
14:04:05 <Steven> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/a-w3c-inputmode-test-report071130.pdf
Steven Pemberton: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/a-w3c-inputmode-test-report071130.pdf ←
14:04:19 <oedipus> SP: need to correct test report with above URI
Steven Pemberton: need to correct test report with above URI ←
14:05:03 <oedipus> SP: [fixed implementation report - can now get PDF report from draft]
Steven Pemberton: [fixed implementation report - can now get PDF report from draft] ←
14:05:11 <oedipus> MB: input mode?
Mark Birbeck: input mode? ←
14:06:09 <oedipus> SP: since rest has been implemented, only new item is input mode -- we had exchange with Steve Bratt to see if ok to have single implementation because is optional feature, and he said that was ok; have to organize another transition call with SteveB
Steven Pemberton: since rest has been implemented, only new item is input mode -- we had exchange with Steve Bratt to see if ok to have single implementation because is optional feature, and he said that was ok; have to organize another transition call with SteveB ←
14:06:23 <oedipus> RM: see if he's happy then schedule LC
Roland Merrick: see if he's happy then schedule LC ←
14:06:33 <oedipus> SP: will take us to CR
Steven Pemberton: will take us to CR ←
14:06:53 <oedipus> ACTION SP: ensure SteveB ok with single implementation and get transition in progress
ACTION SP: ensure SteveB ok with single implementation and get transition in progress ←
14:07:15 <oedipus> TOPIC: Mime Type
14:08:24 <oedipus> SP: Karl seems to think anything not absolutely valid and without application/xml mime-type is NOT xhtml -- that's only a single person's opinion
Steven Pemberton: Karl seems to think anything not absolutely valid and without application/xml mime-type is NOT xhtml -- that's only a single person's opinion ←
14:08:34 <oedipus> SP: DanC agrees with us but doesn't see the problem
Steven Pemberton: DanC agrees with us but doesn't see the problem ←
14:08:59 <oedipus> SP: will discuss at this week's HTC call -- request discussion now or simply move ahead
Steven Pemberton: will discuss at this week's HTC call -- request discussion now or simply move ahead ←
14:09:39 <oedipus> RM: prepare materials to be published as part of the mime-types first draft; explain what we have done, what has changed, and what is purpose, can then bring up at HTC
Roland Merrick: prepare materials to be published as part of the mime-types first draft; explain what we have done, what has changed, and what is purpose, can then bring up at HTC ←
14:10:05 <oedipus> SP: like fact that there are a lot of major web sites delivering xhtml as text/html -- proves can be done and that it works without doing any harm
Steven Pemberton: like fact that there are a lot of major web sites delivering xhtml as text/html -- proves can be done and that it works without doing any harm ←
14:10:57 <oedipus> RM: seen doctype "HTML Core" but use closing slashes -- real mixture both ways
Roland Merrick: seen doctype "HTML Core" but use closing slashes -- real mixture both ways ←
14:11:09 <oedipus> SP: drop line to webmaster to change doctype
Steven Pemberton: drop line to webmaster to change doctype ←
14:11:34 <oedipus> GJR: FYI: the "official" format of Open Accessibility (http://a11y.org) specs is XHTML 1.0 Strict
Gregory Rosmaita: FYI: the "official" format of Open Accessibility (http://a11y.org) specs is XHTML 1.0 Strict ←
14:11:44 <oedipus> SP: Shane preparing new draft to take to HTC
Steven Pemberton: Shane preparing new draft to take to HTC ←
14:11:56 <oedipus> RM: don't foresee any problem -- already allowed
Roland Merrick: don't foresee any problem -- already allowed ←
14:12:12 <oedipus> TOPIC: CURIE Transition
14:12:31 <oedipus> RM: everything ready to go, but we don't have shane on call -- suggestions as to topics while we wait
Roland Merrick: everything ready to go, but we don't have shane on call -- suggestions as to topics while we wait ←
14:12:48 <oedipus> SP: could briefly talk about TAG's opinion about mime-type when using RDFa
Steven Pemberton: could briefly talk about TAG's opinion about mime-type when using RDFa ←
14:12:51 <oedipus> RM: pointer?
Roland Merrick: pointer? ←
14:13:24 <oedipus> SP: comes under RDFa syntax; have action to let TAG know we disagree -- was drafting reply and realized we hadn't spoken with RDFa group, so i raised it at last week's meeting
Steven Pemberton: comes under RDFa syntax; have action to let TAG know we disagree -- was drafting reply and realized we hadn't spoken with RDFa group, so i raised it at last week's meeting ←
14:13:32 <Steven> http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-minutes.html
Steven Pemberton: http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-minutes.html ←
14:13:43 <Steven> http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-minutes.html#item02
Steven Pemberton: http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-minutes.html#item02 ←
14:13:52 <oedipus> SP: self-describing web (item 2)
Steven Pemberton: self-describing web (item 2) ←
14:14:49 <oedipus> SP: BenA (chair of Task Force) asked if TAG wrong; Ralph abstained no one else agreeed; RDFa group almost unanimously agree with us that media type doesn't need to be updated to use RDFa data in HTML
Steven Pemberton: BenA (chair of Task Force) asked if TAG wrong; Ralph abstained no one else agreeed; RDFa group almost unanimously agree with us that media type doesn't need to be updated to use RDFa data in HTML ←
14:14:54 <oedipus> RM: namespace?
Roland Merrick: namespace? ←
14:15:11 <Zakim> +McCarron
Zakim IRC Bot: +McCarron ←
14:15:23 <oedipus> SP: don't understand TAG point at all or what is foundation of belief -- hard to argue against updating media type
Steven Pemberton: don't understand TAG point at all or what is foundation of belief -- hard to argue against updating media type ←
14:16:04 <oedipus> MB: TAG logic is that somebody should not be held accountable for statements made unless accountability indicator
Mark Birbeck: TAG logic is that somebody should not be held accountable for statements made unless accountability indicator ←
14:16:19 <oedipus> SM: proposed wording towards end of last call
Shane McCarron: proposed wording towards end of last call ←
14:16:38 <oedipus> SP: norm walsh proposed wording or you (ShaneM) proposed wording
Steven Pemberton: norm walsh proposed wording or you (ShaneM) proposed wording ←
14:17:06 <oedipus> MB: NormW raised issues, ShaneM replied, and everything was ok -- Norm's was most vocal objection, and we have cleared it
Mark Birbeck: NormW raised issues, ShaneM replied, and everything was ok -- Norm's was most vocal objection, and we have cleared it ←
14:17:10 <oedipus> SP: pointer?
Steven Pemberton: pointer? ←
14:17:33 <oedipus> SM: has an issue number in tracker (not at PC)
Shane McCarron: has an issue number in tracker (not at PC) ←
14:18:11 <oedipus> SM: suggested wording something like "conforming parsers MUST extract triples if present; authors who want to use triples should use proper methods" or words to that effect
Shane McCarron: suggested wording something like "conforming parsers MUST extract triples if present; authors who want to use triples should use proper methods" or words to that effect ←
14:18:21 <oedipus> RM: where can we find the exchange
Roland Merrick: where can we find the exchange ←
14:18:29 <oedipus> SM: in the RDFa task force log somewhere
Shane McCarron: in the RDFa task force log somewhere ←
14:18:40 <oedipus> SP: NormW's emails all about missing @profile in test case
Steven Pemberton: NormW's emails all about missing @profile in test case ←
14:19:03 <oedipus> SM: origin of issue; DanC asked why test cases didn't all have @profile and then others asked why isn't that required
Shane McCarron: origin of issue; DanC asked why test cases didn't all have @profile and then others asked why isn't that required ←
14:19:32 <oedipus> SP: quotes from NormW -- (pointer?)
Steven Pemberton: quotes from NormW -- (pointer?) ←
14:19:59 <oedipus> SM: interesting that NW thinks we are changing the meaning of HTML; so does TBL -- don't think we have done that at all
Shane McCarron: interesting that NW thinks we are changing the meaning of HTML; so does TBL -- don't think we have done that at all ←
14:20:02 <oedipus> SP: me neither
Steven Pemberton: me neither ←
14:20:05 <oedipus> GJR: nor me
Gregory Rosmaita: nor me ←
14:20:12 <oedipus> SP: next steps?
Steven Pemberton: next steps? ←
14:21:22 <oedipus> SP: if this is all result of a LC comment which has been disposed and the commentor has stated publically can live with WG's response, can we move forward -- TAG document only a WD, so can wait until before LC to comment upon that
Steven Pemberton: if this is all result of a LC comment which has been disposed and the commentor has stated publically can live with WG's response, can we move forward -- TAG document only a WD, so can wait until before LC to comment upon that ←
14:21:34 <oedipus> SP: new doctype
Steven Pemberton: new doctype ←
14:21:48 <oedipus> SM: not new media type, but new doctype
Shane McCarron: not new media type, but new doctype ←
14:21:55 <oedipus> RM: but have introduced new doctype for this
Roland Merrick: but have introduced new doctype for this ←
14:22:33 <oedipus> SP: want one to be able to ID documents that have RDFa in it; then TBL says doctypes are obsolete and advises us to remove DTD...
Steven Pemberton: want one to be able to ID documents that have RDFa in it; then TBL says doctypes are obsolete and advises us to remove DTD... ←
14:22:57 <oedipus> SP: but, having said that, have "version" attribute in XHTML -- is an announcement mechanism, so should point that out to TAG
Steven Pemberton: but, having said that, have "version" attribute in XHTML -- is an announcement mechanism, so should point that out to TAG ←
14:23:23 <oedipus> SP: have we finalized format of "version" attribute -- struck me that one possible format is identify used in DOCTYPE --
Steven Pemberton: have we finalized format of "version" attribute -- struck me that one possible format is identify used in DOCTYPE -- ←
14:23:29 <oedipus> SM: exactly what is in there now
Shane McCarron: exactly what is in there now ←
14:23:40 <oedipus> SM: inconsistent with XHTML 1.0 and 1.1 and Basic
Shane McCarron: inconsistent with XHTML 1.0 and 1.1 and Basic ←
14:23:56 <oedipus> SM: use longer formal public identifier
Shane McCarron: use longer formal public identifier ←
14:24:03 <oedipus> SM: never investigated this
Shane McCarron: never investigated this ←
14:24:56 <oedipus> SP: issues about doctype -- doctype causes current browsers use DTD to switch to standards mode; nowadays have to do that to be in standards mode
Steven Pemberton: issues about doctype -- doctype causes current browsers use DTD to switch to standards mode; nowadays have to do that to be in standards mode ←
14:25:13 <Zakim> -McCarron
Zakim IRC Bot: -McCarron ←
14:25:23 <oedipus> SP: second if want character entities, HAVE to use doctypes -- if can't solve those issues, doctypes going to be around for a long time to come
Steven Pemberton: second if want character entities, HAVE to use doctypes -- if can't solve those issues, doctypes going to be around for a long time to come ←
14:25:36 <Zakim> + +1.763.767.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.763.767.aacc ←
14:25:38 <oedipus> RM: that's exactly what problem is
Roland Merrick: that's exactly what problem is ←
14:25:42 <ShaneM> zakim, aacc is ShaneM
Shane McCarron: zakim, aacc is ShaneM ←
14:25:42 <Zakim> +ShaneM; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +ShaneM; got it ←
14:26:02 <oedipus> SP: TBL recently started talking down doctypes and i'm not sure why or why he cares
Steven Pemberton: TBL recently started talking down doctypes and i'm not sure why or why he cares ←
14:26:22 <oedipus> RM: not playing down doctypes per se, but stating no need for doctype
Roland Merrick: not playing down doctypes per se, but stating no need for doctype ←
14:26:27 <oedipus> SP: shouldn't be a "must"
Steven Pemberton: shouldn't be a "must" ←
14:26:38 <oedipus> RM: just said "remove doctypes" from our specs, not the world
Roland Merrick: just said "remove doctypes" from our specs, not the world ←
14:26:45 <oedipus> SM: i thought he said remove DTD
Shane McCarron: i thought he said remove DTD ←
14:26:49 <oedipus> RM: what's the diff?
Roland Merrick: what's the diff? ←
14:26:58 <oedipus> SM: DTD schema declaration
Shane McCarron: DTD schema declaration ←
14:27:24 <oedipus> RM: remove doctype requirement, not forcing loading of DTD -- if want to validate, need to keep doctype
Roland Merrick: remove doctype requirement, not forcing loading of DTD -- if want to validate, need to keep doctype ←
14:28:03 <oedipus> SM: reads from TBL -- besides, don't have "must" but "should"
Shane McCarron: reads from TBL -- besides, don't have "must" but "should" ←
14:28:16 <oedipus> RM: what ascpect of that do you disagree with -- insist on DTDs forever?
Roland Merrick: what ascpect of that do you disagree with -- insist on DTDs forever? ←
14:28:39 <oedipus> SM: M12n 1.1 has to have a DTD -- no other implementation technique; second need DTD to validate
Shane McCarron: M12n 1.1 has to have a DTD -- no other implementation technique; second need DTD to validate ←
14:28:43 <oedipus> SP: doesn't hurt anyone
Steven Pemberton: doesn't hurt anyone ←
14:29:15 <oedipus> SM: if want XHTML+RDFa to work in current browsers have to have announcement mechanism browsers understand, and that is doctype
Shane McCarron: if want XHTML+RDFa to work in current browsers have to have announcement mechanism browsers understand, and that is doctype ←
14:29:42 <oedipus> RM: Shane saying we do need announcement mechanism
Roland Merrick: Shane saying we do need announcement mechanism ←
14:29:53 <oedipus> SM: for it to work in existing browsers
Shane McCarron: for it to work in existing browsers ←
14:29:59 <oedipus> RM: how does that make a difference?
Roland Merrick: how does that make a difference? ←
14:30:15 <oedipus> SP: doctype declaration mark is what browsers use to switch into standards mode
Steven Pemberton: doctype declaration mark is what browsers use to switch into standards mode ←
14:30:40 <oedipus> SM: want XHTML document to render properly
Shane McCarron: want XHTML document to render properly ←
14:30:56 <oedipus> RM: standards mode about processing, not about processing xhtml
Roland Merrick: standards mode about processing, not about processing xhtml ←
14:31:19 <oedipus> SM: consistent rendering comes from standards mode
Shane McCarron: consistent rendering comes from standards mode ←
14:31:34 <oedipus> RM: what has to do with RDFa?
Roland Merrick: what has to do with RDFa? ←
14:31:53 <oedipus> SM: nothing -- require for consistency amongst the family -- has nothing to do with RDFa, but XHTML
Shane McCarron: nothing -- require for consistency amongst the family -- has nothing to do with RDFa, but XHTML ←
14:31:59 <oedipus> RM: don't require in RDFa
Roland Merrick: don't require in RDFa ←
14:32:11 <oedipus> SM: wg told me to make it a "should" a few months ago
Shane McCarron: wg told me to make it a "should" a few months ago ←
14:32:29 <oedipus> RM: trying to understand what you think we need and why TBL doesn't understand what we need
Roland Merrick: trying to understand what you think we need and why TBL doesn't understand what we need ←
14:33:34 <oedipus> SP: TBL wants markup that states "this document has RDFa in it" -- DTD not wanted because "old fashioned" -- our response is DTD not required, but is quite useful (for validation, for example) -- does no harm can leave out or include -- also method currently used as marker to declare RDFa
Steven Pemberton: TBL wants markup that states "this document has RDFa in it" -- DTD not wanted because "old fashioned" -- our response is DTD not required, but is quite useful (for validation, for example) -- does no harm can leave out or include -- also method currently used as marker to declare RDFa ←
14:33:49 <oedipus> SP: if took away would have to invent another markup
Steven Pemberton: if took away would have to invent another markup ←
14:33:58 <oedipus> SM: have "version" atttribute for that
Shane McCarron: have "version" atttribute for that ←
14:35:30 <oedipus> SM: all that aside, issue of XHTML family docs and behavior when delivered as text/html -- another thread; note suggests that way to ensure document works consistently is to use DTD, follow appendix c (moving to doctype portion), -- if do that, should behave properly and render properly across UAs
Shane McCarron: all that aside, issue of XHTML family docs and behavior when delivered as text/html -- another thread; note suggests that way to ensure document works consistently is to use DTD, follow appendix c (moving to doctype portion), -- if do that, should behave properly and render properly across UAs ←
14:35:59 <oedipus> SP: do we need to do anything with TAG right now -- this discussion has gone over to RDFa task force, and turned up there as LC comments; should leave issue there to be dealt with
Steven Pemberton: do we need to do anything with TAG right now -- this discussion has gone over to RDFa task force, and turned up there as LC comments; should leave issue there to be dealt with ←
14:36:21 <oedipus> RM: agree
Roland Merrick: agree ←
14:36:46 <oedipus> scribe's note: SP's Action Item on RDFa comments disposed (being done by others)
scribe's note: SP's Action Item on RDFa comments disposed (being done by others) ←
14:37:00 <oedipus> TOPIC: CURIEs
14:37:19 <oedipus> SM: sent status - i think is ready to go, markB had a few comments
Shane McCarron: sent status - i think is ready to go, markB had a few comments ←
14:37:30 <oedipus> RM: ready to go to LC -- just needs transition request
Roland Merrick: ready to go to LC -- just needs transition request ←
14:37:38 <oedipus> SP: sent transition request last week --
Steven Pemberton: sent transition request last week -- ←
14:37:49 <oedipus> SM: update working draft today
Shane McCarron: update working draft today ←
14:37:57 <oedipus> SP: who will send message?
Steven Pemberton: who will send message? ←
14:38:19 <oedipus> ACTION Steven: send message about CURIEs transition
ACTION Steven: send message about CURIEs transition ←
14:38:26 <ShaneM> FYI - RDFa version attribute declaration is <!ENTITY % XHTML.version "XHTML+RDFa 1.0" >
Shane McCarron: FYI - RDFa version attribute declaration is <!ENTITY % XHTML.version "XHTML+RDFa 1.0" > ←
14:38:31 <oedipus> RM: Role Module status?
Roland Merrick: Role Module status? ←
14:38:37 <oedipus> RM: can we take to LC today?
Roland Merrick: can we take to LC today? ←
14:38:58 <oedipus> SM: as far as i'm concerned ready to go last week -- question remaining relates to CURIEs
Shane McCarron: as far as i'm concerned ready to go last week -- question remaining relates to CURIEs ←
14:39:45 <oedipus> MB: discussions offlist about way CURIEs and Role interact -- my issue is don't think should insist that values that are non-prefixed are invalid; should let those who import role into host language should be allowed to do so
Mark Birbeck: discussions offlist about way CURIEs and Role interact -- my issue is don't think should insist that values that are non-prefixed are invalid; should let those who import role into host language should be allowed to do so ←
14:40:08 <oedipus> MB: 2 choices -- let docs go through or try and resolve on list so doesn't haunt us during LC
Mark Birbeck: 2 choices -- let docs go through or try and resolve on list so doesn't haunt us during LC ←
14:40:27 <oedipus> MB: as far as timing, LC comments can be incorporated easily, so shouldn't hold up progress of document
Mark Birbeck: as far as timing, LC comments can be incorporated easily, so shouldn't hold up progress of document ←
14:40:40 <oedipus> SP: idea of LC is that WG has dealt with all issues in its ken
Steven Pemberton: idea of LC is that WG has dealt with all issues in its ken ←
14:40:46 <oedipus> SP: prefer to discuss on list
Steven Pemberton: prefer to discuss on list ←
14:40:57 <oedipus> RM: values of role attribute fixed?
Roland Merrick: values of role attribute fixed? ←
14:41:51 <oedipus> SM: concerns about CURIE draft or how Role uses it?
Shane McCarron: concerns about CURIE draft or how Role uses it? ←
14:42:09 <oedipus> MB: minor change needs to be made to Role to use CURIEs
Mark Birbeck: minor change needs to be made to Role to use CURIEs ←
14:42:14 <oedipus> SM: thought resolved
Shane McCarron: thought resolved ←
14:42:26 <oedipus> RM: thought problem only with Role -- other problems?
Roland Merrick: thought problem only with Role -- other problems? ←
14:42:36 <ShaneM> http://htmlwg.mn.aptest.com/htmlwg/curie is the live editors draft
Shane McCarron: http://htmlwg.mn.aptest.com/htmlwg/curie is the live editors draft ←
14:42:47 <oedipus> MB: i need to re-check, but need to allow un-prefixed values in CURIE spec
Mark Birbeck: i need to re-check, but need to allow un-prefixed values in CURIE spec ←
14:42:50 <oedipus> SM: we do that
Shane McCarron: we do that ←
14:42:59 <ShaneM> curie := [ [ prefix ] ':' ] reference
Shane McCarron: curie := [ [ prefix ] ':' ] reference ←
14:43:27 <oedipus> MB: thought that had changed -- if i review after meeting with SM, can move forward on CURIEs and will raise Role issue on list as requested
Mark Birbeck: thought that had changed -- if i review after meeting with SM, can move forward on CURIEs and will raise Role issue on list as requested ←
14:43:56 <oedipus> RM: close CURIE today -- go to LC or not; role will take as long as takes to obtain agreement
Roland Merrick: close CURIE today -- go to LC or not; role will take as long as takes to obtain agreement ←
14:44:24 <oedipus> RESOLVED: CURIEs issues closed - will move forward to LC
RESOLVED: CURIEs issues closed - will move forward to LC ←
14:44:50 <oedipus> ACTION MarkB: once CURIE draft pushed, post to public-xhtml2 list on Role issues
ACTION MarkB: once CURIE draft pushed, post to public-xhtml2 list on related Role issues ←
14:45:20 <oedipus> MB: if WG happy with shane and me making changes will do; if not will raise 2 issues on list
Mark Birbeck: if WG happy with shane and me making changes will do; if not will raise 2 issues on list ←
14:45:43 <oedipus> s/on Role issues/on related Role issues
14:46:01 <oedipus> RM: hope to get Role resolved next week
Roland Merrick: hope to get Role resolved next week ←
14:46:20 <Zakim> -ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: -ShaneM ←
14:46:26 <Zakim> -Steven
Zakim IRC Bot: -Steven ←
14:46:27 <oedipus> RM: reconvene this time (or later, depending upon where you are) next week
Roland Merrick: reconvene this time (or later, depending upon where you are) next week ←
14:46:27 <Zakim> -Roland
Zakim IRC Bot: -Roland ←
14:46:27 <Zakim> -markbirbeck
Zakim IRC Bot: -markbirbeck ←
14:46:35 <oedipus> rrsagent, draft minutes
rrsagent, draft minutes ←
14:46:35 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus ←
14:46:42 <Zakim> -Gregory_Rosmaita
Zakim IRC Bot: -Gregory_Rosmaita ←
14:46:43 <Zakim> IA_XHTML2()9:45AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: IA_XHTML2()9:45AM has ended ←
14:46:44 <Zakim> Attendees were +0138687aaaa, Roland, Steven, Gregory_Rosmaita, +0208761aabb, markbirbeck, McCarron, +1.763.767.aacc, ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were +0138687aaaa, Roland, Steven, Gregory_Rosmaita, +0208761aabb, markbirbeck, McCarron, +1.763.767.aacc, ShaneM ←
14:46:58 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes
Steven Pemberton: rrsagent, make minutes ←
14:46:58 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-xhtml-minutes.html Steven
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-xhtml-minutes.html Steven ←
14:47:18 <Steven> rrsagent, make log public
Steven Pemberton: rrsagent, make log public ←
14:47:25 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes
Steven Pemberton: rrsagent, make minutes ←
14:47:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-xhtml-minutes.html Steven
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-xhtml-minutes.html Steven ←
Formatted by CommonScribe