IRC log of tagmem on 2004-12-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:51:38 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
19:55:04 [Chris]
Chris has joined #tagmem
20:00:07 [Noah]
Noah has joined #tagmem
20:00:10 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()2:30PM has now started
20:00:17 [Zakim]
+Roy_Fielding
20:00:30 [Zakim]
+[IBMCambridge]
20:00:40 [Noah]
zakim, [IBMCambridge] is me
20:00:40 [Zakim]
+Noah; got it
20:00:57 [Chris]
zakim, passcode
20:00:57 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'passcode', Chris
20:01:09 [Chris]
zakim, this will be tag
20:01:09 [Zakim]
ok, Chris, I see TAG_Weekly()2:30PM already started
20:01:12 [Chris]
zakim, passcode?
20:01:12 [Zakim]
the conference code is 0824 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), Chris
20:01:19 [Zakim]
+Stuart
20:01:44 [Zakim]
+Chris
20:01:59 [Chris]
Stuart, hit reload on your agenda
20:02:05 [roy_scribe]
roy_scribe has joined #tagmem
20:02:31 [Zakim]
+[Microsoft]
20:02:43 [pbc]
pbc has joined #tagmem
20:02:45 [Chris]
Zakim, Microsoft holds Paul
20:02:45 [Zakim]
sorry, Chris, I do not recognize a party named 'Microsoft'
20:03:31 [Chris]
rrsagent, pointer?
20:03:31 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2004/12/06-tagmem-irc#T20-03-31
20:03:58 [Chris]
Scribe: Chris
20:04:04 [Chris]
Chair: Stuart
20:04:16 [Stuart]
zakim, who is here?
20:04:16 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Roy_Fielding, Noah, Stuart, Chris, [Microsoft]
20:04:17 [Zakim]
On IRC I see pbc, Roy, Noah, Chris, RRSAgent, Zakim, Stuart
20:04:18 [Chris]
Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/12/06-tag.html
20:04:40 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
20:04:44 [DanC]
DanC has joined #tagmem
20:04:52 [Zakim]
+DanC
20:05:05 [Zakim]
+TimBL
20:05:31 [timbl]
Zakim, who is here?
20:05:31 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Roy_Fielding, Noah, Stuart, Chris, [Microsoft], DanC, TimBL
20:05:33 [Zakim]
On IRC I see DanC, timbl, pbc, Roy, Noah, Chris, RRSAgent, Zakim, Stuart
20:05:43 [Chris]
Stuart: Regrets for upcoming telcons, please say if these are not accurate
20:06:08 [Chris]
Noah will scribe on 13th Dec
20:06:24 [Chris]
Stuart: Minutes OK?
20:06:30 [Chris]
Paul: Fine by me
20:06:33 [Chris]
no objections
20:06:45 [Chris]
Resolved: approve minutes of 22 Nov
20:07:03 [Chris]
Stuart: Minutes of f2f not ready yet, in progress
20:07:35 [Chris]
Topic: AC Meeting feedback
20:08:08 [Chris]
TimBL announced that Stuart would not be running
20:08:39 [Chris]
Asked for feedback, not very much
20:09:00 [Chris]
Some private feedback on report and slides. No new action items arising
20:09:18 [Chris]
Noah: Some people reported using the arch doc, that was gratifying
20:09:55 [Chris]
Paul: Extensibility and Versioning came up several times at AC in various forms. Likely to be a TP agenda item
20:10:25 [Chris]
ACTION: Stuart tak with David Ezell and Steve Bratt about extensibility and versioning
20:10:50 [Chris]
Topic: Last Call on xml:id
20:11:14 [Chris]
Chris: Seems good, thanks that they incorporated earlier feedback
20:12:00 [Chris]
DanC: Suggested xml:id like XInclude needs good testing
20:13:21 [Chris]
(discussion of type reported by ID assignment)
20:14:23 [Stuart]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xml-id-20041109/#with-schema-validation
20:16:44 [Chris]
Roy: some style issues, putting definitions of things in square brackets, don't like it personally
20:16:55 [Chris]
Paul: I disagree there
20:18:00 [Chris]
Stuart: OK but that is a style issue not technical
20:18:37 [Chris]
(discussion of whether to close the issue - not yet_
20:19:30 [Chris]
Stuart: OK to respond with 'no further comments'
20:19:46 [Chris]
Dan: As longas it asks again about CR plans and testing
20:20:00 [Chris]
Resoolved: No further comments except testing
20:20:14 [Chris]
ACTION: Chris send response to Core about xml:id
20:20:17 [Roy]
Under normal English, anything inside sqquare brackets can be removed -- they are non-normative statements. Obviously, that is not the case here. I suggest that the W3C ask a literature department (like Harvard or Chicago) what they think the document says, and perhaps suggest a more useful signage for definitions
20:20:30 [pbc]
q+
20:20:31 [Chris]
Topic: Review of QA WG Last call
20:20:47 [Stuart]
ack pbc
20:20:54 [DanC]
roy, that stylesheet is maintained in spec-prod@w3.org ; care to send your comment there? (not all W3C specs use that stylesheet)
20:20:56 [Chris]
Stuart: Do we want to review the whole thing, or just the E&V part?
20:21:10 [Roy]
sure, thanks for the pointer
20:21:11 [Chris]
Paul: Didn't we askk them to review our E&V already?
20:21:27 [Chris]
Paul: Suget we correlate the messages in both directions
20:21:41 [Chris]
s/Suget/Suggest/
20:21:58 [Chris]
Stuart: Whole document, or more scoped?
20:22:07 [Chris]
Stuart: Who will review this?
20:22:16 [Chris]
Paul: Constrain to E&V
20:23:00 [Chris]
Paul: Their spec is fairly positive, good material
20:23:16 [DanC]
q+
20:23:29 [Chris]
ACTION: Paul to point QA at E&V and pass on TAG comments as we get them
20:23:56 [Stuart]
ack DanC
20:23:58 [Chris]
Dan: E&V finding - original issue is only XML vocabularies
20:24:12 [pbc]
q+
20:24:13 [pbc]
q+
20:24:20 [Chris]
Dan: So shoul we look at just XML, or protocols and non XML formats?
20:25:16 [Chris]
q+ to talk about non E&V stuff in qaframe
20:25:22 [Stuart]
ack pbc
20:25:41 [Chris]
Paul: Issue was not updated after Ottawa f2f were we agreed on a work plan issue is stale now
20:26:32 [Chris]
Noah: OK so the records do not relect the minutes trail
20:27:03 [Chris]
Nah: Good to revisit the whole issue, what its scope is, and do what Paul said cheking its consistent
20:27:05 [DanC]
(I'm pretty sure the TAG hasn't made any decisions on extensibility/versioning)
20:27:19 [Chris]
s/cheking/checking/
20:27:57 [Noah]
s/Nah/Noah/
20:28:22 [Chris]
ack Chris
20:28:22 [Zakim]
Chris, you wanted to talk about non E&V stuff in qaframe
20:28:30 [Noah]
q?
20:29:17 [pbc]
Plan for Issue 41: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jul/0027.html
20:30:09 [Chris]
Chris: also needs review of things likeconformance criteria (WebArch has none as agreed, might need to say why more clearly)
20:31:20 [Chris]
ACTION: Chris together with Paul, create draft review of qaframe
20:32:26 [Chris]
Paul: Jan 10 is target meeting for more E&V discussion
20:32:38 [Chris]
... and invite DO to that
20:32:44 [DanC]
that's from memory, and PC isn't sure it's Jan 10
20:33:05 [Chris]
Topic: WebArch publication
20:33:18 [Chris]
Stuart: Proposal for 'Volume One'
20:33:32 [Chris]
TimBL: Can't think of anything better
20:33:38 [Chris]
Stuart: Part One?
20:33:57 [Chris]
TimBL: Implies that the volumes are disjoint
20:34:21 [Chris]
TimbL: Can bring out a second edition of volume One if needed
20:34:59 [timbl]
s/edition/version/
20:35:23 [Chris]
Noah: Provided the second version is clarifications rather than changes
20:35:37 [Chris]
Stuart: any objections
20:35:40 [Chris]
(none)
20:35:57 [Chris]
Resolved: Change to Volume One
20:36:02 [DanC]
(stuart took the 'action' there?)
20:36:24 [Chris]
ACTION: Stuart tell Ian tha Volume One is fine
20:36:27 [Chris]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Nov/0061.html
20:37:28 [Chris]
Chris: This is ediorial, links to empty erratta and translations
20:37:54 [Chris]
http://www.w3.org/2004/12/webarch-pressrelease.html.en
20:39:29 [DanC]
s/announced/announces/. press releases are written in the ever-present tense (please).
20:39:33 [Noah]
Is Janet still the right contact, as listed on the press release?
20:39:42 [DanC]
I expect so, Noah
20:40:30 [DanC]
her new title is something like "U.S. press officer"
20:41:57 [timbl]
cliché: "solve all the world's problems". "describe anything like the full range of technology involved in the web today".
20:44:07 [Chris]
(Chris describes the overall structure of the press release and the points being made)
20:44:40 [Chris]
Noah: Worries over committingto "Volume Two' rather than, say 'SemWeb Arch Supplement" or whatever.
20:45:01 [Chris]
Chris: "One or more subsequent volumes"
20:45:05 [pbc]
q+
20:45:50 [Chris]
Noah: "Future publications from the TAG will build on"
20:46:43 [Chris]
Paul: Third title is bad, scrub 'world problems' be more positive
20:47:08 [DanC]
(eek! "does not solve all of the world's problems" not in jest! indeed. let's rework)
20:47:32 [Chris]
work continues on architectute, TAG will take experience from ""
20:47:38 [Chris]
... and agree with Noah
20:48:45 [Chris]
Dan: impact on web users? none, snoring, or exciting news?
20:48:59 [Chris]
TimBL: its not a final report, it should have an effect
20:49:29 [DanC]
("paint dries" is my comment more on the actual event than this text)
20:49:33 [Chris]
... need to get people reading it, use as course materials, already adopted by some courses, reference for building new technologies
20:50:30 [Chris]
q+ to talk about other quotes and testimonials
20:50:41 [Chris]
(Dan interviews TimBL)
20:50:44 [Stuart]
q- pbc
20:52:12 [Chris]
Stuart: This is the W3Cs first Architectural Recommendation. Loosely connect with 10 years?
20:52:23 [Chris]
..distills 10 years of experience
20:53:26 [Chris]
(Dan interviews Paul)
20:53:46 [Chris]
.. principles for people to build new internet standards and new web technologies
20:53:55 [Chris]
... web will continue to evolve
20:54:05 [Chris]
(further discussions)
20:54:50 [Chris]
TimBL: as web grows, new peopl eneed to get up to speed more quickly
20:55:16 [Chris]
ws sw speech and multimodal, powerfulnew parts, need to understand existing architecture
20:55:22 [DanC]
(somehow I think mixing in voice, mobile, etc. early in the press release will punch it up)
20:57:51 [timbl]
Noah, where Chris had had 'had", had had "had had". "had had" had had the consensus of the tag.
20:58:00 [Chris]
(Stuart interviews Dan)
20:58:35 [Chris]
an: most of what you need to know in one place
20:58:41 [Chris]
s/an/Dan
20:58:55 [Chris]
Roy: Orthogonality is key principle
20:59:09 [DanC]
"Volume one of the Web Architecture provides a basis as W3C begins integrating Voice browsing and mobile access with traditional technologies"
20:59:24 [DanC]
(begins... voicexml 2.0 is already a REC. hmm.)
20:59:27 [Chris]
Noah: URI as key naming principle, universal network
21:00:27 [DanC]
q+ to answer stuart's #1 principle? question with: One Web
21:00:41 [Chris]
ack Chris
21:00:41 [Zakim]
Chris, you wanted to talk about other quotes and testimonials
21:00:56 [DanC]
"so that you can change one without having to change another" <- good words
21:01:26 [DanC]
"unprecedented scale" <- good words
21:01:29 [Chris]
Noah: Web as network on unprecedented scale
21:01:48 [Stuart]
+1 on good words
21:02:28 [Chris]
TimBL: web is so big that adding to it needs to be done with understanding
21:02:37 [Stuart]
extending without breaking
21:03:03 [DanC]
(how to say the opposite of "if you change one part, the whole thing falls over")
21:03:06 [Chris]
leveraging
21:03:13 [Chris]
standing on shoulders of giants
21:03:19 [DanC]
too trite
21:03:52 [timbl]
How one can add a new piece of technology on such a way as to constructively leverage the work which has been done by others.
21:04:02 [Chris]
agree its too trite to use those words
21:04:06 [Stuart]
ack Dan
21:04:06 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to answer stuart's #1 principle? question with: One Web
21:04:25 [pbc]
Paul has to leave now.
21:04:27 [Stuart]
Synergy
21:04:52 [Chris]
Dan: If you add to the One web then its much better than trying to make a separate non interoperable part
21:05:05 [Zakim]
-[Microsoft]
21:05:06 [Chris]
Paul: Startd bal rolling on testimonial
21:16:14 [Chris]
(further discussion of plans for WebArch)
21:23:31 [Noah]
Chris raises the editorial suggestions made by Noah
21:23:34 [Noah]
Noah says he's seen Chris
21:23:44 [Noah]
Noah says he's seen Chris's email response and is fine with everything suggested
21:24:11 [Noah]
S/Chris's/Chris'/
21:24:15 [Chris]
Dan: comment on clash with 3023
21:24:33 [Chris]
Stuart: yes, we know, this is why 3023 is being revised. existingissue
21:25:49 [Chris]
Roy: IESG made its decision on IRI based on publication of draft 11
21:26:17 [Stuart]
q?
21:26:41 [Chris]
... now waiting on RFC editor
21:26:47 [Chris]
rrsagent, pointer?
21:26:47 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2004/12/06-tagmem-irc#T21-26-47
21:28:16 [Zakim]
-Roy_Fielding
21:28:18 [Zakim]
-Chris
21:28:44 [DanC]
hunting... http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?type=1#IRIEverywhere-27
21:29:27 [DanC]
http://www.w3.org/2003/04/iri.html
21:33:43 [Noah]
zakim, who is here?
21:33:43 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Noah, Stuart, DanC, TimBL
21:33:44 [Zakim]
On IRC I see DanC, timbl, pbc, Noah, Chris, RRSAgent, Zakim, Stuart
21:33:53 [DanC]
my comment on xquery and URIs: "why the special case for % in fn:escape-uri?" http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2003Mar/0027.html
21:35:09 [Zakim]
-Stuart
21:35:30 [Zakim]
-TimBL
21:35:38 [Zakim]
-Noah
21:35:45 [Zakim]
-DanC
21:35:46 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()2:30PM has ended
21:35:47 [Zakim]
Attendees were Roy_Fielding, Noah, Stuart, Chris, [Microsoft], DanC, TimBL