IRC log of sml on 2007-12-03
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 21:03:39 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #sml
- 21:03:39 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/12/03-sml-irc
- 21:04:16 [pratul]
- Agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2007Dec/0002.html
- 21:04:44 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #sml
- 21:05:50 [johnarwe]
- scribe: Kumar
- 21:06:07 [johnarwe]
- zakim, who's here?
- 21:06:07 [Zakim]
- sorry, johnarwe, I don't know what conference this is
- 21:06:08 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see RRSAgent, johnarwe, pratul, Jordan, MSM, ginny, Kumar, Kirk, trackbot-ng
- 21:06:15 [johnarwe]
- zakim, this is SML
- 21:06:17 [Zakim]
- ok, johnarwe; that matches XML_SMLWG()4:00PM
- 21:06:41 [Kumar]
- scribenick: Kumar
- 21:07:09 [Kumar]
- Meeting: SML WG Conf Call on Monday
- 21:07:20 [Kumar]
- chair: Pratul
- 21:07:47 [Kumar]
- topic: Approval of minutes from previous meeting
- 21:08:11 [Kumar]
- Pratul: is there any objection to the minutes?
- 21:08:16 [Kumar]
- no objections heard.
- 21:08:32 [Kumar]
- Pratul: minutes are approved
- 21:08:50 [Kumar]
- Pratul: W3C has deadline for publication on 12/21/2007
- 21:09:35 [Kumar]
- Pratul: given that it takes about 5 days for the webmaster to go through the publication process, we should have goal to send the LC draft to webmaster by 12/14
- 21:10:35 [Kumar]
- Pratul: LC does not mean that no further discussions are possible. It only means that the WG has no more open issues. New issues can be brought up by the community.
- 21:11:06 [Kumar]
- topic: Review and attempt consensus on the following needsReview bugs
- 21:12:09 [Kumar]
- topic: bug# 4675
- 21:14:39 [Kumar]
- ginny: I have second thoughts on the the 2 levels of compliance. I changed my mind and I believe there should only be a single level. This is better for compliance.
- 21:18:31 [Kumar]
- Pratul: Zulah has asked to defer the discussion on EPR scheme and the compliance level bug.
- 21:19:29 [Kumar]
- Kumar: ginny, can you add a specific proposal for 4675?
- 21:19:35 [Kumar]
- ginny: yes
- 21:22:37 [Kumar]
- topic: bug# 4687
- 21:23:15 [Kumar]
- Pratul: any objections to the changes to 4687?
- 21:23:35 [Kumar]
- Pratul: no objections heard. Mark it as fixed
- 21:23:47 [Kumar]
- topic: bug# 4770
- 21:25:27 [Kumar]
- Pratul: any objections?
- 21:25:37 [Kumar]
- Pratul: no objections heard. Please mark as fixed.
- 21:25:44 [Kumar]
- topic: bug# 4992
- 21:30:05 [Kumar]
- Kirk: Is the sentence "Whether new schemes satisfy these conditions will be
- 21:30:05 [Kumar]
- clear from their scheme definitions." clear enough? I think we should change it to something more specific/positive.
- 21:30:14 [ginny]
- Fix per comment #12 to include rewording of last sentence in bullet #1 to state that scheme authors should specify whether the scheme satisfies condition a and b.
- 21:30:53 [Kumar]
- Pratul: Agreed. Are there objections to other changes?
- 21:31:00 [Kumar]
- Pratul: no objection heard.
- 21:31:21 [Kumar]
- ginny: I will mark it back as editorial.
- 21:32:12 [Kumar]
- topic: bug# 5106
- 21:32:51 [Kumar]
- Pratul: Zulah wants to discuss EPR scheme. We should defer the discussion to Thu call.
- 21:33:24 [Kumar]
- topic: bug# 5291
- 21:45:31 [Kumar]
- Kumar: I am not sure why we need to add this text. Consistency of ref schemes is only relevant in the context of reference resolution. The text to be added is already covered under reference resolution.
- 21:52:33 [Kumar]
- Kumar: at least we should change the section title to reflect the fact that the section is about comparing ref targets. This could be done as a part of the bug# 4992
- 21:52:40 [Kumar]
- topic: bug# 5294
- 21:53:38 [Kumar]
- Pratul: This is about adding a comment to the schema. Any objections?
- 21:54:32 [Kumar]
- Pratul: No objections heard. Resolve as fixed.
- 21:55:53 [ginny]
- s/fixed/editorial/
- 21:55:53 [Kumar]
- Kumar: One question about changes for bug# 5291. There used to be a section that described the steps involved in reference resolution. This section seems to have been removed. This section should be put back.
- 21:56:25 [Kumar]
- Kumar: I will open a bug for this.
- 21:56:35 [Zakim]
- -[Microsoft.a]
- 21:56:37 [Zakim]
- - +1.530.823.aaaa
- 21:56:40 [Zakim]
- - +1.603.823.aabb
- 21:56:53 [Zakim]
- -??P9
- 21:56:55 [Kumar]
- Pratul: Let us continue the discussion on Thu. We should try to get closure on all issues at that time.
- 21:57:01 [Zakim]
- -[Microsoft]
- 21:57:06 [Kumar]
- rrsagent, generate minutes
- 21:57:06 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/12/03-sml-minutes.html Kumar
- 21:57:17 [Zakim]
- -Jordan
- 21:57:19 [Zakim]
- XML_SMLWG()4:00PM has ended
- 21:57:20 [Zakim]
- Attendees were [Microsoft], ginny, Kirk, Jordan
- 21:57:31 [Kumar]
- rrsagent, make log public
- 21:57:46 [johnarwe]
- johnarwe has left #sml
- 21:59:08 [Kumar]
- rrsagent, bye
- 21:59:08 [RRSAgent]
- I see no action items