IRC log of tagmem on 2004-10-18

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:45:05 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
18:45:09 [Norm]
Just doing my part to get us through. There's at least one of those we should probably talk about, uhm, the one I didn't bat back, I'll check which one
18:48:33 [DanC]
Zakim, this will be TAG
18:48:33 [Zakim]
ok, DanC; I see TAG_Weekly()2:30PM scheduled to start 18 minutes ago
18:48:43 [Norm]
0TAG, DanC
18:49:10 [Norm]
ah
18:49:42 [Chris]
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
18:49:42 [Chris]
<html>
18:49:42 [Chris]
<head>
18:49:42 [Chris]
<meta name="generator" content="
18:49:42 [Chris]
HTML Tidy for Cygwin (vers 1st September 2003), see www.w3.org">
18:49:43 [Chris]
<title></title>
18:49:45 [Chris]
</head>
18:49:47 [Chris]
<body>
18:49:49 [Chris]
&yuml;
18:49:51 [Chris]
</body>
18:49:53 [Chris]
</html>
18:51:38 [Norm]
Heh
18:53:04 [Norm]
ping?
18:53:19 [Norm]
zakim, who's here?
18:53:19 [Zakim]
sorry, Norm, I don't know what conference this is
18:53:20 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, Stuart, Chris, DanC, Norm
18:53:20 [Chris]
WARNING: No meeting title found!
18:53:20 [Chris]
You should specify the meeting title like this:
18:53:20 [Chris]
<dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting
18:55:21 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
18:55:39 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()2:30PM has now started
18:55:46 [Zakim]
+Norm
18:55:48 [timbl]
RRSagent, stop
18:59:04 [Zakim]
+ +1.781.883.aaaa
19:00:02 [Zakim]
+TimBL
19:00:51 [Chris]
zakim, dial chris-617
19:00:51 [Zakim]
ok, Chris; the call is being made
19:00:52 [Zakim]
+Chris
19:01:16 [timbl]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
19:01:16 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Norm, +1.781.883.aaaa, TimBL, Chris
19:01:28 [Zakim]
+Stuart
19:01:37 [timbl]
Zakim, +1.781.883.aaaa is Noah
19:01:37 [Zakim]
+Noah; got it
19:01:44 [Zakim]
+DanC
19:01:45 [Zakim]
+Roy
19:02:19 [Norm]
zakim, pick a scribe
19:02:19 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose DanC
19:02:50 [Stuart]
zakim, who is here?
19:02:51 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Norm, Noah, TimBL, Chris, Stuart, Roy, DanC
19:02:51 [Zakim]
On IRC I see timbl, RRSAgent, Zakim, Stuart, Chris, DanC, Norm
19:03:19 [DanC]
Scribe: DanC
19:03:46 [DanC]
scribe next week: Chris
19:04:02 [DanC]
chair next week: Stuart
19:04:14 [paulc]
paulc has joined #tagmem
19:04:19 [DanC]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
19:04:19 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Norm, Noah, TimBL, Chris, Stuart, Roy, DanC
19:04:45 [DanC]
Noah: partial regrets.
19:05:16 [DanC]
. ACTION CL: Chris collect IRC logs from last f2f ( cf pointers for assembling meeting minutes of 11 Aug) and turn into minutes.
19:05:20 [Zakim]
+[Microsoft]
19:05:29 [Norm]
zakim, +[microsoft is paulc
19:05:29 [Zakim]
sorry, Norm, I do not recognize a party named '+[microsoft'
19:05:34 [Norm]
zakim, [microsoft is paulc
19:05:34 [Zakim]
+paulc; got it
19:05:42 [DanC]
CL reports problems with a tool that seemed to be working before.
19:06:27 [DanC]
SW: propose http://www.w3.org/2004/08/09-tagmem-irc http://www.w3.org/2004/08/10-tagmem-irc and http://www.w3.org/2004/08/11-tagmem-irc
19:07:07 [DanC]
... and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Aug/0025.html
19:07:15 [DanC]
DanC: gotta make the latter public
19:07:19 [Chris]
Otherwise I will make the proposal that we accept the following as as
19:07:19 [Chris]
full and accurate account of the meeting that we are going to get:
19:07:19 [Chris]
http://www.w3.org/2004/08/09-tagmem-irc
19:07:19 [Chris]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Aug/0025.html
19:07:19 [Chris]
http://www.w3.org/2004/08/10-tagmem-irc
19:07:20 [Chris]
http://www.w3.org/2004/08/11-tagmem-irc
19:07:32 [Zakim]
-Noah
19:07:35 [DanC]
so RESOLVED. ACTION DanC: make http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Aug/0025.html public
19:08:05 [DanC]
PROPOSED: to accept http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/10/05-07-tag.html as a true record. 2nd.
19:08:20 [DanC]
so RESOLVED.
19:09:02 [DanC]
SW: thanks, Dan, for making prose minutes
19:09:09 [timbl]
+1
19:09:12 [DanC]
SW: today's agenda... http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/10/18-tag
19:09:33 [DanC]
ACTION PC: create draft summary for AC, get it to Steve Bratt by Oct 22
19:09:38 [DanC]
3.
19:09:38 [DanC]
* ACTION TBL: to investigate possible staff contact for TAG, due date 20 October 2004
19:09:49 [DanC]
ACTION TBL: to investigate possible staff contact for TAG, due date 20 October 2004
19:09:54 [DanC]
(continued without discussion)
19:10:09 [DanC]
Topic: 1.1 TAG Charter (10 mins max!)
19:10:38 [DanC]
SW: NM expressed some concerns [... missed?]
19:10:57 [DanC]
PC: I've forwarded the revised charter to colleages in microsoft
19:11:03 [DanC]
... don't have an answer yet
19:11:28 [DanC]
PC: the 25 Oct deadline is not a lot of time
19:11:37 [DanC]
... I can see the motivation for it...
19:12:00 [Stuart]
NM expressed concerned that he does not what his own disclosure obligations are.
19:12:16 [DanC]
withdrawn due to lack of critical mass: Proposal: The TAG welcomes the revisions proposed in the draft TAG Charter. (member visible)
19:12:51 [DanC]
SW: skipping over "Generalised Representations: DONE: ACTION NM ..." for now...
19:13:05 [DanC]
Topic: 2.1 Review of 2nd Last Call Document
19:13:38 [DanC]
NW: going well... http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/webarch-20041014/
19:13:52 [DanC]
... I missed an update to the "... however ..." bit re RFC2119
19:14:02 [DanC]
DONE: ACTION NDW: to fix cross references to "uri allocation" that read "uri assignment"
19:14:08 [DanC]
DONE: ACTION NDW: add "for more info, see also" link to a section of a QA spec to 4.x
19:14:15 [DanC]
DONE: ACTION NDW: to produce an editor's draft by 14 Oct (COB EDT)
19:14:39 [DanC]
...........
19:14:43 [DanC]
* Use of "assign" for URI -> resource
19:14:47 [Stuart]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0024.html
19:15:08 [DanC]
SW: I intend to go 7, 20, infores, rest
19:16:02 [DanC]
"I can 'live with' whatever wording you choose" -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0024.html
19:16:17 [DanC]
ACTION SW: Close that thread Use of "assign" for URI -> resource
19:16:58 [timbl]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2004Aug/0007.html is the minutes of the meeting
19:17:08 [timbl]
of the URIRev04 BOF
19:18:38 [DanC]
RoyF: let's get involved in the discussion of the revision of URI registration guidelines docs
19:19:01 [DanC]
From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
19:19:01 [DanC]
To: 'Eric Hellman' <eric@openly.com>
19:19:01 [DanC]
Cc: uri@w3.org
19:19:01 [DanC]
Subject: RE: updating RFC 2718 (Guidelines for new URL schemes)
19:19:01 [DanC]
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 23:23:23 -0700
19:20:17 [DanC]
revision documents seem to be forthcoming but not yet available
19:21:03 [DanC]
RF, NW, SW volunteer to participate in the review.
19:21:45 [DanC]
PC: I like the idea of letting them know what's in webarch now
19:23:26 [DanC]
SW will let LMM know we'll gladly get involved in review of guideslines in his action.
19:23:42 [DanC]
RF: FYI, IESG approved URI spec as IETF Standard.
19:24:10 [DanC]
SW: unfortunately, there are comments from Dubost that we didn't discuss in Basel.
19:24:29 [paulc]
Looking at KD14 in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004JulSep/0048.html
19:24:31 [DanC]
NW: I responded "... are you satisifed" or "... could you be more specific" for all but K14...
19:25:02 [Stuart]
*KD 014
19:25:02 [Stuart]
4.5.7. Media Types for XML
19:25:02 [Stuart]
""" In general, a representation provider SHOULD NOT assign Internet
19:25:02 [Stuart]
media types beginning with "text/" to XML representations."""
19:25:02 [Stuart]
Hmmmm.... I'm not sure. I understand. But for example if you want to
19:25:03 [Stuart]
display the source code of a XHTML file with text/plain, it's perfectly
19:25:05 [Stuart]
valid and a useful case.
19:26:11 [DanC]
NW: but for the case of a page that's a source view of XML, text/plain would seem to be a good idea...
19:26:27 [timbl]
q+
19:26:51 [Stuart]
ack timbl
19:27:09 [DanC]
CL: [scribe got too involved to take notes]
19:27:20 [Chris]
wonders about text/plain;charset="utf-16"
19:27:45 [DanC]
TBL: I don't think the special case of a source view merits a change in webarch
19:27:46 [Chris]
um, well,
19:27:54 [Norm]
The root is http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0053.html
19:28:01 [DanC]
tbl, pls reply to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0053.html
19:28:17 [Chris]
Chris (explains text/* required fallback to text/plain;charset="us-ascii")
19:28:38 [DanC]
ACTION TimBL: reply to KD014 defending current text
19:28:55 [Norm]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0055.html
19:29:08 [DanC]
KD016 Orthogonal specifications http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0055.html
19:29:18 [Stuart]
* KD 016
19:29:18 [Stuart]
5.1. Orthogonal Specifications
19:29:18 [Stuart]
"""the software developer community would benefit from being able to
19:29:18 [Stuart]
find all HTTP headers from the HTTP specification (including any
19:29:18 [Stuart]
associated extension registries and specification updates per IETF
19:29:20 [Stuart]
process). Perhaps as a result, this feature of the HTML specification
19:29:21 [Stuart]
is not widely deployed. """
19:31:03 [Stuart]
Not true. Use case. I'm a technical writer, I'm explaining how to
19:31:03 [Stuart]
create an HTML file, foo.html, I give a link to the html representation
19:31:03 [Stuart]
of foo.html and therefore served as text/html. Now I want to explain
19:31:03 [Stuart]
the source code, and I would like to use the benefits of the object
19:31:03 [Stuart]
element to display the source code of the same file. So I set in my
19:31:05 [Stuart]
object element the text/plain mime type.
19:31:06 [Stuart]
Though because of precedences rules of HTTP over HTML, the only way to
19:31:08 [Stuart]
do is to not specify on the server side the mime type but only in the
19:31:10 [Stuart]
meta of the HTML file. So that once it can be displayed as an HTML file
19:31:12 [Roy]
Roy has joined #tagmem
19:31:12 [Stuart]
or it can be displayed as a text file.
19:31:48 [Roy]
Roy has left #tagmem
19:31:55 [DanC]
NDW thinks he's replied "I don't think this merits a change", though the archive doesn't yet show it
19:32:38 [Roy]
Roy has joined #tagmem
19:32:46 [DanC]
Topic: Information Resources
19:33:21 [DanC]
SW: Stickler was not satisfied by the text we agreed in Basel.
19:33:26 [DanC]
... suggested 2 changes.
19:33:53 [DanC]
... 1 is a change to the wording of the definition of information resource
19:34:23 [DanC]
... 2nd is to define both Web Resource and Information Resource
19:34:43 [DanC]
DanC: I'm not persuaded to change our decision from Basel
19:34:47 [DanC]
CL, NW: me too.
19:35:20 [DanC]
SW: anyone care to support the changes? [silence]
19:35:28 [DanC]
SW: I'll let him know we discuss it.
19:35:57 [DanC]
ACTION SW: inform Stickler re information resources
19:36:06 [paulc]
I have to step away for 30 seconds.
19:37:30 [DanC]
NW: "one may compare" no longer occurs; yes, I think I deleted the 2 sentences
19:37:35 [paulc]
... back now
19:38:43 [DanC]
DanC: how about [closed] and pls fwd your question to www-tag for discussion
19:38:52 [Roy]
okay
19:39:10 [DanC]
ACTION RF: reply [closed] and pls fwd your question to www-tag for discussion re non-authoritative syntaxes for fragment identifiers
19:40:08 [Chris]
> > - in 3.3.1, "One cannot carry out an HTTP POST operation using a URI
19:40:08 [Chris]
> > that identifies a secondary resource." this seems very HTTP-specific;
19:40:08 [Chris]
> > any chance this refers to something broader? Otherwise, I suggest it
19:40:08 [Chris]
> > should belong to the HTTP spec, not to WebArch.
19:41:13 [Chris]
no longer occurs - moot
19:41:26 [DanC]
ACTION SW: respond to Dom re resources/representations
19:41:40 [DanC]
NW: section on secondary has been redone. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/webarch-20041014/#def-secondary-resource
19:42:22 [DanC]
"I expect that you should hear a reply from us
19:42:22 [DanC]
by Monday EOB"
19:42:27 [DanC]
CL: I'll ping again.
19:42:36 [DanC]
... re too positive on extensibility
19:43:35 [DanC]
(ok, so that one's really in commenter-wait state; Dom's msg wasn't a state-changing msg)
19:44:55 [DanC]
(in the agenda, italics denote "commentor wait state")
19:45:03 [Chris]
ping sent
19:45:11 [DanC]
ACTION DC: to reply to commenter re primary and secondary resources. CONTINUES. with apologies
19:45:25 [DanC]
ACTION DC: point out new "URIs are central to web arch" text in reply to Karl, ask if that satisfies. CONTINUES. with apologies.
19:45:51 [DanC]
* [Tim Bray] Review of webarch-20040816 is in commentor-wait
19:46:11 [DanC]
NW: I prodded him last week.
19:47:24 [DanC]
* Re: KD 004
19:47:46 [DanC]
is in commentor wait, as of CL's 7 Oct msg. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0011.html
19:48:54 [DanC]
DanC: we've done as much on "Late last-call comment on AWWW" as I think we ought.
19:49:08 [Zakim]
+Noah
19:49:37 [DanC]
... it's cited from the Basel minutes.
19:49:48 [Stuart]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/webarch/#xml-links
19:49:53 [DanC]
* HTML WG last call comment ...
19:50:31 [DanC]
... which has come out of commentor-wait state.
19:52:11 [Stuart]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Oct/0050.html
19:52:21 [DanC]
rather, it's still in commentor wait state, but the commentor has given us an update out-of-band
19:53:07 [DanC]
SW: I'm willing to follow up, showing them the specific text.
19:53:52 [DanC]
ACTION SW: update HTML WG on specific text re xlink
19:54:10 [DanC]
* # Editorial comments on 28 Sep 2004 Editor's Draft of Web Arch
19:54:39 [DanC]
NDW responded, putting this in commentor-wait state.
19:55:24 [DanC]
PC: his message is all editorial, giving us license to do as we may; let's close it.
19:55:53 [DanC]
ACTION NDW: close thread on editorial input from ij
19:56:25 [Stuart]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0003.html
19:56:46 [Zakim]
-Noah
19:57:13 [DanC]
* Late last-call comment on AWWW http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0003.html re 4.5.3
19:57:50 [DanC]
TimBL: "One particularly useful mapping in the case of flat namespaces (specified, for example, in [RDFXML]) is to combine the namespace URI, a hash ("#"), and the local name, thus creating a URI for a secondary resource (the identified term)." is buggy.
19:58:21 [DanC]
TimBL: it would have been nicer that way, but actually the rule is just to concatenate.
19:58:57 [DanC]
NDW: how about I s/ a hash ("#"),//
19:59:26 [DanC]
CL: the "thus creating..." bit falls apart
19:59:34 [Chris]
no, that only works if the URI ended in a #
19:59:48 [Zakim]
+Noah
19:59:55 [Chris]
would be a better algorithm to add a hash *if required*
19:59:56 [Zakim]
-Noah
19:59:57 [DanC]
ACTION NDW: fix "One particularly useful mapping in the case of flat namespaces (specified, for example, in [RDFXML]) is to combine the namespace URI, a hash ("#"), and the local name, thus creating a URI for a secondary resource (the identified term)."
20:00:06 [Stuart]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004JulSep/0130.html
20:00:07 [timbl]
He is right. to concatenate a namespace name ending in "#" with...
20:00:43 [DanC]
* URIs and resources http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004JulSep/0130.html
20:00:56 [Zakim]
+Noah
20:01:46 [DanC]
TimBL: how about [missed specific suggestion]
20:02:02 [DanC]
... "specifications associated with the scheme name"
20:02:13 [DanC]
PC: that's what he suggests.
20:03:17 [DanC]
DanC: let's refer to where we traced the path thru all the specs
20:03:21 [DanC]
NDW: I'm willing to fix...
20:04:58 [DanC]
ah... rabbit-chase is 3.1.1. Details of retrieving a representation
20:05:58 [Roy]
+1 to clarification by reference
20:06:16 [DanC]
ACTION NDW: fix "relevant specifications", incorporating a cross-reference to 3.1.1 Details of retrieving a representation
20:07:59 [DanC]
* Some thoughts on effective access to "primary" vs "secondary" resources, consistency of descriptions, and bootstrapping the semantic web...
20:08:21 [DanC]
DanC: this one's late
20:08:30 [DanC]
a few skimmed it; it doesn't seem to merit further attention
20:09:03 [DanC]
-------
20:09:22 [DanC]
NW: I now have 2 actions... is that it? If so, I can have a spec for next week.
20:09:52 [DanC]
SW: 1st noah's text...
20:10:30 [DanC]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/10/webarch-nm/ArchdocNoahMediaTypeRevs.html
20:10:50 [DanC]
Architecture of the World Wide Web, First Edition
20:10:50 [DanC]
Editor's Draft with Noah Mendelsohn Resource Typing Proposal 14 October 2004
20:11:25 [DanC]
NM: [recaps the genesis of this action...]
20:11:38 [DanC]
DONE: ACTION NM: to take a run through to see how generalizing 'representation' to be less constrained would look with more careful terminology, report on whether this looks feasible or not.: see draft of Thu, 14 Oct 2004 15:01:12 -0400
20:12:20 [DanC]
q+ to ask what term NM is suggesting for bag-of-bits-with-mime-type
20:12:44 [DanC]
CL: I like that text you wrote in 3.2
20:13:09 [DanC]
NM: section by section... 1. Introduction
20:13:41 [DanC]
| the noun "representation" means "[{NOAH>} Machine readable data that encodes octets that encode resource state information".
20:13:47 [Chris]
sorry i was only going to the green items in the toc
20:14:52 [DanC]
NM: in 2.4. URI Schemes ...
20:15:07 [Chris]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/10/webarch-nm/ArchdocNoahMediaTypeRevs.html#schemes-and-representations
20:16:33 [DanC]
(once again, I'll point out that the I18N WG commented on the pronouceability of Oxaca)
20:16:53 [DanC]
NM: new good practice: Reuse representation formats
20:17:15 [Stuart]
q?
20:17:20 [Chris]
I like the direction this is going
20:17:30 [Norm]
q+
20:17:39 [Roy]
q+
20:17:42 [Chris]
q+ to give general agreement
20:17:43 [DanC]
" New protocols created for the web SHOULD transmit representations as octet streams typed by Internet media types."
20:18:19 [Stuart]
ack danc
20:18:19 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to ask what term NM is suggesting for bag-of-bits-with-mime-type
20:18:26 [Stuart]
ack Norm
20:18:34 [DanC]
NM: I've read it now, and I like it.
20:18:50 [Stuart]
ac Roy
20:18:54 [Stuart]
ack Roy
20:18:55 [DanC]
RF: I don't like the way "protocol" is used...
20:19:05 [DanC]
... it's really about assignment of names [?]
20:19:39 [timbl]
protocols
20:19:40 [DanC]
RF: I sent mail about this. (PC notes having received it. pointer?)
20:19:58 [timbl]
q+ to talk about "protocols"
20:20:30 [DanC]
RF: HTTP protocol is used to proxy representations of resources named with ftp: etc.
20:20:58 [DanC]
NM: I think that's what I was trying to say, but I guess I misused "protcol"
20:21:06 [DanC]
RF: yes, this problem predates your changes.
20:22:33 [Chris]
ha! So I was right to focus on 3.2 Interactions section :)
20:22:37 [DanC]
NM: do we have a name for protocol, as opposed to scheme? [the point is more subtle, but the scribe has no hope]
20:23:04 [Chris]
the use of the protocols, the transfer, is the interactions section
20:23:40 [Chris]
q?
20:24:13 [DanC]
(scribe thinks he hears on-the-wire-protocol, naming-scheme, and relationships between those and representations being discussed...)
20:24:40 [Chris]
scribe seems to be correct, to me
20:25:06 [DanC]
(DanC is concerned by the frequency of "whatever we call it" references; deciding on the terms is 80% of the work)
20:25:07 [Stuart]
ack Chris
20:25:07 [Zakim]
Chris, you wanted to give general agreement
20:25:14 [DanC]
ack chris
20:25:25 [DanC]
CL: I like NM's text in 3.2 ...
20:25:44 [DanC]
... [missed]. There are other protocols that use MIME: email, ...
20:25:57 [DanC]
NM: how about moving some of the story from [where?] to 3.2?
20:25:59 [DanC]
CL: yes...
20:26:09 [Chris]
from 2.4.1
20:26:09 [Stuart]
q?
20:26:16 [timbl]
q-
20:26:45 [Chris]
protcol should be 'scheme name' perhaps, in section 2
20:26:55 [DanC]
NM: I read the webarch spec as saying [something] that I gather isn't what the TAG meant.
20:27:49 [Chris]
[something] = use of protocols, rather than registration of scheme names
20:28:53 [Chris]
i thought I was being asked a question!
20:29:11 [DanC]
SW: does this merit another last call?
20:29:14 [Chris]
q+ to carry on with my rationale
20:29:24 [DanC]
CL, NW: no. DC: it introduces that risk, yes
20:29:32 [Roy]
I don't know how to determine when a change requires new last call
20:30:33 [DanC]
DELTA does not merit a new last call if, when presented with LC+DELTA, the LC reviewers would say "yes, my review applies to that document too"
20:31:31 [Norm]
q+
20:31:46 [Chris]
ack me
20:31:46 [Zakim]
Chris, you wanted to carry on with my rationale
20:31:51 [DanC]
ack norm
20:32:30 [DanC]
NW: I'll make the 2 actioned changes, checkpoint that, and then take a stab at incorporating changes from NM
20:32:54 [DanC]
SW: separately-named docs? NW: OK.
20:33:17 [Zakim]
-paulc
20:33:22 [Zakim]
-Norm
20:33:24 [Zakim]
-Noah
20:33:30 [Zakim]
-Roy
20:33:46 [DanC]
ACTION NDW: attempt to incorporate input from NM and RF etc. on generalizing representations
20:34:18 [DanC]
ADJOURN.
20:34:22 [DanC]
hmm... did we slip? http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/10/05-07-tag.html#plan234
20:34:37 [Norm]
Yes, I think we've slipped a week
20:34:45 [Norm]
Dunno if we can make up the time or not
20:36:41 [DanC]
well, it's not certain that we've slipped.
20:36:51 [DanC]
but yes, I think we're dipping into our contingency
20:36:59 [Chris]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/10/05-07-tag.html#plan234
20:37:06 [Chris]
apparently not
20:37:13 [Zakim]
-DanC
20:37:17 [Zakim]
-TimBL
20:37:20 [Zakim]
-Stuart
20:37:22 [Zakim]
-Chris
20:37:23 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()2:30PM has ended
20:37:24 [Zakim]
Attendees were Norm, TimBL, Chris, Stuart, Noah, DanC, Roy, [Microsoft], paulc
20:39:52 [Norm]
Uhm.
20:39:53 [DanC]
RRSAgent, bye
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
I see 14 open action items:
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: PC to create draft summary for AC, get it to Steve Bratt by Oct 22 [1]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T19-09-33
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: TBL to to investigate possible staff contact for TAG, due date 20 October 2004 [2]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T19-09-49
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: SW to Close that thread Use of "assign" for URI -> resource [3]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T19-16-17
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: TimBL to reply to KD014 defending current text [4]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T19-28-38
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: SW to inform Stickler re information resources [5]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T19-35-57
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: RF to reply [closed] and pls fwd your question to www-tag for discussion re non-authoritative syntaxes for fragment identifiers [6]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T19-39-10
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: SW to respond to Dom re resources/representations [7]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T19-41-26
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: DC to to reply to commenter re primary and secondary resources. CONTINUES. with apologies [8]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T19-45-11
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: DC to point out new "URIs are central to web arch" text in reply to Karl, ask if that satisfies. CONTINUES. with apologies. [9]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T19-45-25
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: SW to update HTML WG on specific text re xlink [10]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T19-53-52
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: NDW to close thread on editorial input from ij [11]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T19-55-53
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: NDW to fix "One particularly useful mapping in the case of flat namespaces (specified, for example, in [RDFXML]) is to combine the namespace URI, a hash ("#"), and the local name, thus creating a URI for a secondary resource (the identified term)." [12]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T19-59-57
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: NDW to fix "relevant specifications", incorporating a cross-reference to 3.1.1 Details of retrieving a representation [13]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T20-06-16
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: NDW to attempt to incorporate input from NM and RF etc. on generalizing representations [14]
20:39:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/18-tagmem-irc#T20-33-46