16:56:22 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
16:56:22 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/05/12-tagmem-irc
16:56:45 <JeniT> JeniT has joined #tagmem
16:57:31 <noah> noah has joined #tagmem
17:00:56 <noah> zakim, who is here?
17:00:56 <Zakim> sorry, noah, I don't know what conference this is
17:00:57 <Zakim> On IRC I see noah, JeniT, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ashok, jar, plinss, Yves, trackbot
17:01:13 <noah> zakim, this is TAG
17:01:13 <Zakim> ok, noah; that matches TAG_Weekly()1:00PM
17:01:17 <Ashok> meeting:  TAG Weekly
17:01:17 <noah> zakim, who is here?
17:01:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P5, Noah_Mendelsohn, Ashok_Malhotra
17:01:20 <Zakim> On IRC I see noah, JeniT, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ashok, jar, plinss, Yves, trackbot
17:01:25 <JeniT> Zakim, ??P5 is me
17:01:25 <noah> zakim, who is talking?
17:01:29 <Ashok> chair:  Noah
17:01:34 <DKA> DKA has joined #tagmem
17:01:37 <Zakim> +JeniT; got it
17:01:52 <Zakim> noah, listening for 12 seconds I heard sound from the following: Noah_Mendelsohn (6%), Ashok_Malhotra (30%)
17:02:04 <Zakim> +Yves
17:02:14 <Zakim> +Jonathan_Rees
17:02:26 <noah> zakim, who is here?
17:02:34 <Zakim> On the phone I see JeniT, Noah_Mendelsohn, Ashok_Malhotra, Yves, Jonathan_Rees
17:02:34 <Ashok> regrets:  TimBL, Peter_Linss
17:02:40 <Zakim> On IRC I see DKA, noah, JeniT, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ashok, jar, plinss, Yves, trackbot
17:02:43 <Ashok> scribe:  Ashok
17:02:49 <Ashok> \scribenick:  Ashok
17:02:55 <ht> ht has joined #tagmem
17:03:18 <Zakim> + +44.207.266.aaaa
17:03:31 <DKA> zakim, aaaa is DKA
17:03:31 <Zakim> +DKA; got it
17:03:33 <Zakim> +plinss
17:03:54 <ht> zakim, code?
17:03:54 <Zakim> the conference code is 0824 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), ht
17:04:03 <Ashok> present: JeniT, Noah_Mendelsohn, Ashok_Malhotra, Yves, Jonathan_Rees, Henry_Thompson, Peter_Linss
17:04:10 <Zakim> +??P10
17:04:22 <Ashok> Topic:  Convene
17:04:26 <ht> zakim, ? is me
17:04:26 <Zakim> +ht; got it
17:04:39 <Ashok> present+: Dan_Appelquist
17:04:54 <noah> zakim, who is here?
17:04:54 <Zakim> On the phone I see JeniT, Noah_Mendelsohn, Ashok_Malhotra, Yves, Jonathan_Rees, DKA, plinss, ht
17:04:57 <Zakim> On IRC I see ht, DKA, noah, JeniT, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ashok, jar, plinss, Yves, trackbot
17:05:08 <Zakim> +Noah_Mendelsohn.a
17:05:17 <noah> zakim, Noah_Mendelsohn.a is me
17:05:17 <Zakim> +noah; got it
17:05:30 <Ashok> regrets:: Larry
17:06:33 <Ashok> Topic:  Convene
17:06:52 <Ashok> Noah goes over the agenda
17:07:47 <Ashok> Noah:  I am at risk for next week 
17:07:57 <ht> yes
17:08:12 <ht> 26 scribe -- yes
17:08:59 <Ashok> Topic:  Administrative items 
17:09:32 <Ashok> Noah:  TAG Status Report has been published 
17:10:02 <Ashok> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011May/0028.html
17:10:46 <noah> Previously announced HTML last call schedule: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2011AprJun/0035.html
17:10:56 <Ashok> Noah:  Msg from Paul Cotton re. HTML5 Last Call see above
17:12:03 <DKA> I think it sounds like a good plan.
17:12:11 <JeniT> sure
17:12:12 <DKA> +1 to longer period.
17:12:14 <ht> 8 weeks
17:12:30 <Ashok> Noah:  I  would like a longer review period --- 8 weeks
17:12:53 <ht> Suggest at least one session at f2f to discuss how we approach HTML 5 Last Call review
17:12:54 <DKA> I do feel it's worth it.
17:13:10 <Ashok> ... should we do a serious read-thru ?
17:13:45 <ht> q+ to say 'yes'
17:13:51 <noah> ack next
17:13:53 <Zakim> ht, you wanted to say 'yes'
17:13:55 <DKA> q+ to say 'yes' as well.
17:14:28 <jar> q+ to say will check for a few particular things.  won't read from end to end
17:14:40 <Ashok> ht:  I want to review some items
17:15:51 <Ashok> ... extensive email thread asking prefix bindings issue be reopened
17:16:04 <Ashok> ... want to check that
17:16:29 <noah> ack next
17:16:30 <Zakim> DKA, you wanted to say 'yes' as well.
17:16:31 <ht> s/asking/discussing what it would take for/
17:16:41 <ht> s/issue be/issue to be/
17:17:06 <noah> DKA: Applications, app cache, device capabilities, etc.
17:17:14 <noah> DKA: Applications, app cache, device capabilities, etc.
17:17:15 <noah> ack next
17:17:16 <Zakim> jar, you wanted to say will check for a few particular things.  won't read from end to end
17:17:24 <Ashok> DanA:  I will review stuff related to Web Applications and device capabilities ... and, in general, mobile
17:17:38 <Ashok> JAR:  I will look at the mime-type stuff
17:17:46 <jar> oops I meant media type registration
17:18:06 <ht> HST: DOCTYPE legacy, prefix binding, status of existing HTML in media type registration section
17:21:48 <Ashok> JAR:  Asks aboutb reading for the f2f
17:21:58 <Ashok> s/aboutb/about/
17:22:37 <Ashok> Noah:  Please prepare long items 10 pages or more 10 days or 2 weeks before f2f
17:22:50 <Ashok> ... for shorter documents, 1 week
17:23:18 <Ashok> Topic: [17]ISSUE-66 (mimeAndWeb-66-27): IETF Draft on MIME — Fragment        IDs not "grounded" in media type 
17:23:27 <noah> ACTION-509?
17:23:27 <trackbot> ACTION-509 -- Jonathan Rees to communicate with RDFa WG regarding documenting the fragid / media type issue -- due 2011-03-07 -- PENDINGREVIEW
17:23:27 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/509
17:23:33 <noah> ACTION-543?
17:23:33 <trackbot> ACTION-543 -- Jeni Tennison to propose addition to MIME/Web draft to discuss sem-web use of fragids not grounded in media type -- due 2011-05-10 -- OPEN
17:23:33 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/543
17:24:03 <Ashok> Being tracked under action 509 and 543
17:24:17 <ht> If someone thought they could summarize last week's discussion, that would help me
17:24:23 <ht> As I missed most of it. . .
17:25:34 <ht> I was going to review minutes, but they didn't appear
17:25:54 <ht> q+ to ask about the conneg advice in WebArch. . .
17:26:44 <jar> Their previous issue http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/84
17:26:46 <Ashok> JAR:  I hope my email is being taken as a public comment and they will respond ... se need to track it
17:26:57 <Ashok> s/se/we/
17:27:13 <noah> Minutes from last week, as edited by Larry (may not be polished yet): http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/05/05-minutes
17:27:13 <noah> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/05/05-minutes
17:27:57 <noah> ...pause so group can read minutes from last week...
17:28:28 <jar> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/meetings/2011-05-12#resolution_2
17:29:28 <JeniT> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011May/0027.html
17:30:15 <noah> arg...
17:30:21 <noah> let me dial back.
17:30:28 <Zakim> -noah
17:30:48 <Zakim> +noah.a
17:30:53 <noah> zakim, noah.a is me
17:30:53 <Zakim> +noah; got it
17:31:28 <jar> (Manu) Unfortunately, this practice is not covered by
17:31:28 <jar>   the media type registrations that govern the meaning of
17:31:29 <jar>   fragment identifiers (see section 3.5 of the URI specification
17:31:29 <jar>   [RFC3986], [RFC3023], and [RFC2854]).
17:32:13 <jar> the above is text he (the editor) just sent me...
17:32:42 <noah> Used to say "at present" covered by.
17:33:31 <Ashok> ht:  This is very weak  
17:34:14 <jar> The text from Manu above is not official yet (WG approved)
17:35:01 <Ashok> ht:  It would not be possible to write media-type registrations that were consistent with each other and with 3986
17:35:17 <jar> Manu says: "we'll run it by you to make sure it works for you and the TAG" (before CR)
17:35:33 <noah> JT: Are you saying 3986 prohibits one using fragids in the way that RDF does?
17:35:35 <noah> HT: Not quite.
17:36:27 <jar> q+ to say please treat non-conneg and conneg cases separately
17:36:49 <Yves> conneg text about fragid is only in webarch IIRC
17:36:58 <Ashok> Noah:  3986 says "the ids are grounded in the representations that are rertievable"
17:37:29 <Ashok> ... the answer should be consistent for all reprsentations you can serve up
17:37:38 <noah> HT: Per Web Arch, fragids must be consistent across all possible connegs
17:38:09 <noah> From 3986:
17:38:11 <noah> "The fragment's format and resolution is therefore
17:38:11 <noah>    dependent on the media type [RFC2046] of a potentially retrieved
17:38:11 <noah>    representation, even though such a retrieval is only performed if the
17:38:11 <noah>    URI is dereferenced."
17:38:29 <jar> 3986: "Each representation should either define the
17:38:29 <jar>    fragment so that it corresponds to the same secondary resource,
17:38:29 <jar>    regardless of how it is represented, or should leave the fragment
17:38:29 <jar>    undefined (i.e., not found)."
17:38:53 <noah> q?
17:38:55 <noah> ack next
17:38:56 <Zakim> ht, you wanted to ask about the conneg advice in WebArch. . .
17:39:02 <noah> ack next
17:39:03 <Zakim> jar, you wanted to say please treat non-conneg and conneg cases separately
17:39:56 <Ashok> jar:  I want people to treat the conneg case differently from the base case ... first we must get the base case right
17:40:04 <noah> JAR: Treat conneg and base case separately. Getting the base case right seems a prerequisite to getting conneg right.
17:40:36 <Ashok> ... you could add words to the relevant specs to make them consistent 
17:40:42 <JeniT> q+ to say that that text could only be added to application/xhtml+xml if application/xml allowed it
17:40:49 <Ashok> ... conneg is already problem 
17:41:12 <noah> ack next
17:41:14 <Zakim> JeniT, you wanted to say that that text could only be added to application/xhtml+xml if application/xml allowed it
17:41:31 <Ashok> ht:  I'm worry about what the architects of the original system intended
17:42:03 <JeniT> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011May/0027.html
17:42:11 <Ashok> JeniT: Text could only be added to application/xhtml+xml if application/xml allowed it
17:42:11 <ht> q+ to ask what advice we ever gave Chris about 3023bis and this issue?
17:42:20 <noah> NM: Am I right that for application/xxx+xml, 3032 bis says "it's XPointer"?
17:42:25 <noah> JT: Yes, I think so.
17:42:48 <Ashok> jar:  They want RDFa to be a mix-in for any nedia type
17:42:57 <Ashok> s/nedia/media/
17:43:07 <noah> NM: I think Jeni and I are saying that RDFa core seems to conflict with RFC 3023bis.
17:43:18 <noah> q?
17:43:22 <noah> ack next
17:43:23 <Zakim> ht, you wanted to ask what advice we ever gave Chris about 3023bis and this issue?
17:43:44 <noah> q+ to remind what we said to 3023 bis editors
17:44:03 <jar> http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-xhtml-rdfa-20110331/
17:44:36 <jar> http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-rdfa-core-20100422/
17:45:01 <noah> ack next
17:45:02 <Zakim> noah, you wanted to remind what we said to 3023 bis editors
17:45:46 <Ashok> Noah:  We discussed 3023 bis situation in London ... our initial proposal was that they drop geric processing from the spec
17:45:57 <Ashok> ... they came back and said that was not possible
17:46:06 <JeniT> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Nov/0078.html
17:46:19 <Ashok> ... we then asked them to make an exception for RDF+XML
17:46:23 <ht> s/geric processing/IDs as part of generic processing/
17:46:42 <JeniT> above link is to message to 3023bis editors
17:47:14 <Ashok> Noah:  We have a race condition between RDFCore and 3023bis
17:47:41 <Ashok> Noah:  What will pass final review when RDFa goes forward
17:48:08 <JeniT> q+ to say that I'm worried about 3023bis outside RDFa
17:48:15 <noah> q?
17:48:17 <noah> ack next
17:48:18 <Zakim> JeniT, you wanted to say that I'm worried about 3023bis outside RDFa
17:48:35 <Ashok> ... suggest we wait till Tim is available and then send a note urging consistency between the specs
17:49:17 <noah> NM: I made a specific proposal which was: check whether Tim thinks this is serious. If so, signal to RDFa Core and 3023 bis editors that we consider any incompatibilities between their final proposals to be serious, and encourage them to work that out before RDFa core moves to Candidate Recommendation.
17:50:00 <Ashok> JeniT:  3023bis does not discuss uses of frag-ids in actual practice
17:50:36 <Ashok> ht:  It will be hard to get XMLCore to agree with you on that
17:51:09 <Ashok> ... strongly held positions about frad-ids and barenames
17:51:16 <Yves> +1 to ht suggestion
17:51:43 <Ashok> Noah:  RDFa folks should work with the 3023bis editors
17:52:09 <Ashok> ... we consider the incompatibility serious
17:52:24 <Ashok> q+
17:53:59 <Ashok> Discussion about the inconsistencies
17:54:52 <Ashok> Noah:  Cannot use barenames and generic processing when you have RDFa semantics
17:55:00 <noah> ack next
17:55:46 <noah> NM: I think barenames are the main path case for both of them. I think the generic folks need it to work with >any< URI that resolves to an applicaiton/???+xml and with any application
17:56:28 <Ashok> Ashok:  Do have suggestions about how the specs could be reconciled?  I don't see a possible solution.
17:56:37 <ht> First part of what Jeni said is certainly doable: If a fragid is not (syntactically) an XPointer, then it has at most specific media-type-determined semantics
17:56:59 <ht> s/fragid/fragid on xml media type/
17:57:05 <Ashok> JAR:  There are other frag-id problems
17:57:33 <Ashok> Noah:  I don't see a good solution here either
17:58:10 <ht> Second part, if I understood it, is much harder -- to be blunt, XML was there first, and asking the entire XML community to stop treating barenames as ID-grounded, is not going to happen
17:59:10 <noah> q?
17:59:13 <Ashok> JAR:  I suggested that if there is no element according to XPointer then we resolve by some other means
17:59:22 <Ashok> ... did not get any traction
18:00:04 <noah> ack next
18:00:11 <Ashok> HT:  If it is not *syntactically* an XPointer then it can be resolved by other means
18:01:12 <noah> I'm unconfortable implying that the referent of a URI depends on whether the software doing the processing is specialized
18:01:20 <ht> I tried to push this view at the meeting at Google, but Tim would absolutely not go there
18:01:26 <noah> I >think< that's what Yves is proposing, no?
18:01:40 <noah> q?
18:01:41 <Ashok> Yves:  RDFa processor is not an XML processor ... in HTML if you get JavaScript you change semantics of the # tag
18:01:49 <ht> +1 to Yves suggest that we step back
18:02:17 <jar> yves: Not necessarily a good thing, but it's a fact
18:02:20 <noah> YL: That's a fact, it's what's happening.
18:02:31 <Ashok> ... RDF processor will handle frag-ids differently than a XML processor
18:02:37 <noah> Yes, but my view is: it's happening, it's hugely broken, and if possible we need to do better
18:02:44 <noah> q?
18:03:07 <ht> I note that we don't have a problem with the idea that an XML or HTML editor which doesn't expand entity references is not borken. . .
18:03:09 <Yves> how can we minimize the brokenness 
18:03:23 <ht> s/borken/broken/
18:03:44 <ht> +1 for f2f
18:03:49 <Yves> +1 for f2f
18:03:50 <JeniT> +1 for f2f
18:03:53 <Ashok> Noah:  Next steps ... wait till Tim is with us ... f2f
18:04:45 <Ashok> JAR:  Better if we could something about this before the f2f ... Jeni's msg was great ... we need to admit to the contradiction
18:04:59 <Ashok> Noah:  Fix it or live with it?
18:06:01 <Ashok> ht:  If we can accept that what comes after the # is client-side and may be different in different situations
18:06:53 <Ashok> Noah:  I think this is a huge step backwards
18:07:13 <noah> NM: I am >very< unhappy with that view of URIs. The fragid is part of the URI, the URI identifies whatever it identifies, independent of the software that processes it.
18:07:17 <noah> q?
18:07:33 <Ashok> JAR:  People are in their own world and care only about their uses
18:07:55 <jar> there is no constituency for "one web" (in the sense of one URI namespace)
18:08:20 <Zakim> -ht
18:08:42 <Ashok> Noah:  Could someone prepare for the discussion as the f2f
18:09:30 <noah> ACTION: Jeni with Jonathan to prepare F2F discussion of fragids including #!, RDFa, 3023bis, etc. Due 2011-05-24
18:09:30 <trackbot> Created ACTION-553 - With Jonathan to prepare F2F discussion of fragids including #!, RDFa, 3023bis, etc. Due 2011-05-24 [on Jeni Tennison - due 2011-05-19].
18:09:37 <noah> ACTION-509?
18:09:37 <trackbot> ACTION-509 -- Jonathan Rees to communicate with RDFa WG regarding documenting the fragid / media type issue -- due 2011-03-07 -- PENDINGREVIEW
18:09:37 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/509
18:10:21 <noah> OPEN ACTION-509
18:10:51 <noah> Reopening ACTION-509 
18:11:34 <noah> ACTION-509 Due 2011-06-15
18:11:34 <trackbot> ACTION-509 Communicate with RDFa WG regarding documenting the fragid / media type issue due date now 2011-06-15
18:11:41 <noah> ACTION-543?
18:11:41 <trackbot> ACTION-543 -- Jeni Tennison to propose addition to MIME/Web draft to discuss sem-web use of fragids not grounded in media type -- due 2011-05-10 -- OPEN
18:11:41 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/543
18:11:58 <noah> doing same, reopening
18:12:24 <noah> ACTION-543 Due 2011-06-15
18:12:24 <trackbot> ACTION-543 Propose addition to MIME/Web draft to discuss sem-web use of fragids not grounded in media type due date now 2011-06-15
18:12:30 <noah> topic: API Minimization
18:12:38 <Ashok> Topic: Web Application Architecture: Design of APIs for Web Applications 
18:13:01 <Ashok> DKA:  I have upadted the Minimization draft ... not created a dated version
18:13:35 <DKA> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/APIMinimization.html
18:13:38 <Ashok> s/upadted/updated/
18:13:46 <Ashok> Latest draft above
18:14:25 <Ashok> DKA:  Incorporated Computer Science paper that lays the foundation
18:14:39 <Ashok> ... I've reached out to the DAPS group
18:14:59 <Ashok> ... continuing to seek feedback and implementation experience
18:15:50 <noah> NM: When should TAG members invest in reviewing this in detail?
18:16:40 <noah> DKA: Would welcome guidance on where I should invest, not the right time for detailed review.
18:16:52 <Ashok> DKA:  Need feedback on other experience/papers on the idea.
18:16:53 <noah> NM: Detailed review for F2F?
18:17:00 <noah> DKA: That's my goal.
18:17:18 <noah> ACTION-514?
18:17:18 <trackbot> ACTION-514 -- Daniel Appelquist to draft finding on API minimization Due: 2011-02-01 -- due 2011-04-12 -- OPEN
18:17:18 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/514
18:17:52 <noah> ACTION-514 Due 2011-05-17
18:17:52 <trackbot> ACTION-514 Draft finding on API minimization Due: 2011-02-01 due date now 2011-05-17
18:18:16 <Ashok> Topic:  Overdue Action Items
18:18:26 <noah> Topic: Pending Review Actions
18:18:27 <noah> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/pendingreview
18:18:44 <noah> ACTION-524?
18:18:44 <trackbot> ACTION-524 -- Noah Mendelsohn to close versioning product -- due 2011-04-05 -- PENDINGREVIEW
18:18:44 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/524
18:19:13 <noah> close ACTION-524
18:19:13 <trackbot> ACTION-524 Close versioning product closed
18:19:22 <noah> ACTION-525?
18:19:22 <trackbot> ACTION-525 -- Noah Mendelsohn to check with John before closing http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/products/2 WebApps access control -- due 2011-05-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
18:19:22 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/525
18:20:10 <noah> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2011May/0024.html
18:20:21 <noah> I would expect that this is somehow related to the discussion about CORS, UMP and XHR2
18:21:07 <Ashok> JAR:  I have an ongoing action to alert us when either CORS or UMP goes to Last Call
18:21:21 <noah> NM: This is all broadly under the banner of security?
18:21:23 <Ashok> ... things are moving along
18:21:34 <noah> JAR: Came up originally because of metadata in URIs
18:21:51 <noah> JAR: Defense against cross-site request forgery.
18:22:51 <noah> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/products/2
18:24:19 <Ashok> JAR:  I recommend John's write up as a first draft
18:24:37 <noah> PROPOSAL: Cloes http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/products/2, take ACTION to create product page on security, with John Kemp's security draft as starting point
18:24:53 <noah> s/Cloes/Close/
18:25:12 <noah> RESOLVED: Close http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/products/2, take ACTION to create product page on security, with John Kemp's security draft as starting point
18:25:40 <noah> PRODUCT 2?
18:26:05 <noah> ACTION: Noah to formulate product page for TAG work on security including John Kemp security draft Due: 2011-05-24
18:26:05 <trackbot> Created ACTION-554 - Formulate product page for TAG work on security including John Kemp security draft Due: 2011-05-24 [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2011-05-19].
18:26:22 <noah> close ACTION-525?
18:26:32 <noah> ACTION-552?
18:26:32 <trackbot> ACTION-552 -- Noah Mendelsohn to create logistics page for 6-8 June TAG F2F [self-assigned] -- due 2011-05-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
18:26:32 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/552
18:26:40 <noah> close ACTION-552
18:26:40 <trackbot> ACTION-552 Create logistics page for 6-8 June TAG F2F [self-assigned] closed
18:26:58 <Ashok> Topic:  Overdue Actions
18:26:58 <noah> topic: Overdue actions
18:26:59 <noah> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/overdue?sort=owner
18:27:11 <noah> ACTION-480?
18:27:11 <trackbot> ACTION-480 -- Daniel Appelquist to draft overview document framing Web applications as opposed to traditional Web of documents -- due 2011-04-26 -- OPEN
18:27:11 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/480
18:27:23 <noah> DKA: Working on it
18:27:44 <DKA> action-480?http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/05/WebApps.html
18:28:52 <noah> ACTION-480 Due 2011-05-24
18:28:52 <trackbot> ACTION-480 Draft overview document framing Web applications as opposed to traditional Web of documents due date now 2011-05-24
18:28:53 <Ashok> Noah:  Please look at all overdue actions and bump the due date if necessary
18:29:00 <noah> ACTION-537?
18:29:00 <trackbot> ACTION-537 -- Daniel Appelquist to reach out to Web apps chair to solicit help on framing architecture (incluing terminology, good practice) relating to interaction -- due 2011-04-26 -- OPEN
18:29:00 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/537
18:29:37 <Ashok> DKA:  No progress
18:29:44 <noah> ACTION-537 Due 2011-05-31
18:29:44 <trackbot> ACTION-537 Reach out to Web apps chair to solicit help on framing architecture (incluing terminology, good practice) relating to interaction due date now 2011-05-31
18:29:52 <noah> ACTION-547?
18:29:52 <trackbot> ACTION-547 -- Daniel Appelquist to ask on www-tag and Web Apps mailing lists for advice on moving forward with http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/APIMinimization.html -- due 2011-04-21 -- OPEN
18:29:52 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/547
18:30:15 <noah> ACTION-547 Due 2011-05-17
18:30:15 <trackbot> ACTION-547 Ask on www-tag and Web Apps mailing lists for advice on moving forward with http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/APIMinimization.html due date now 2011-05-17
18:30:59 <Ashok> Noah:  Adjourned
18:31:06 <Zakim> -Yves
18:31:07 <Zakim> -noah
18:31:07 <Zakim> -JeniT
18:31:09 <Zakim> -DKA
18:31:11 <Zakim> -plinss
18:31:14 <Ashok> rrsagent, make logs public
18:31:31 <Ashok> rrsagent, pointer
18:31:31 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2011/05/12-tagmem-irc#T18-31-31
18:31:33 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
20:38:14 <Zakim> -Jonathan_Rees
20:43:15 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, Noah_Mendelsohn, in TAG_Weekly()1:00PM
20:43:19 <Zakim> TAG_Weekly()1:00PM has ended
20:43:20 <Zakim> Attendees were Noah_Mendelsohn, Ashok_Malhotra, JeniT, Yves, Jonathan_Rees, +44.207.266.aaaa, DKA, plinss, ht, noah
20:52:12 <Zakim> Zakim has left #tagmem