IRC log of xhtml on 2008-09-10
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 13:08:00 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #xhtml
- 13:08:00 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/09/10-xhtml-irc
- 13:08:07 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #xhtml
- 13:08:13 [Steven]
- zakim, this will be xhtml
- 13:08:13 [Zakim]
- ok, Steven; I see IA_XHTML2()9:45AM scheduled to start in 37 minutes
- 13:08:24 [Steven]
- rrsagent, make log public
- 13:08:41 [Steven]
- Meeting: XHTML2 WG Weekly Teleconference
- 13:08:44 [Steven]
- Chair: Steven
- 13:08:48 [Steven]
- Regrets: Roland
- 13:32:49 [Roland]
- Roland has joined #xhtml
- 13:39:31 [oedipus]
- oedipus has joined #xhtml
- 13:40:42 [Steven]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Sep/0008
- 13:40:46 [Steven]
- Hey Roland!
- 13:40:55 [Steven]
- Steven has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Sep/0008
- 13:41:39 [Steven]
- wouldn't mind, or would mind, oedipus?
- 13:41:51 [oedipus]
- wouldn't
- 13:41:58 [oedipus]
- Scribe: Gregory_Rosmaita
- 13:42:04 [oedipus]
- ScribeNick: oedipus
- 13:42:31 [Steven]
- You're amazing Gregory. When I have a migraine, I mind everything!
- 13:42:42 [Steven]
- Exvcept lying under a duvet in a darkened room
- 13:42:54 [oedipus]
- survival tactic -- residue of nerve dammage
- 13:43:02 [Steven]
- ha
- 13:43:19 [Steven]
- Remind me where you were Roland
- 13:43:52 [Zakim]
- IA_XHTML2()9:45AM has now started
- 13:44:00 [Zakim]
- +Roland_Merrick
- 13:44:28 [Roland]
- Zakim, Roland_Merrick is Roland
- 13:44:28 [Zakim]
- +Roland; got it
- 13:44:44 [Zakim]
- + +04670855aaaa
- 13:44:59 [Zakim]
- +Gregory_Rosmaita
- 13:45:12 [oedipus]
- zakim, aaaa is Tina
- 13:45:12 [Zakim]
- +Tina; got it
- 13:45:40 [oedipus]
- zakim, who is making noise?
- 13:45:51 [Zakim]
- oedipus, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Roland (5%), Tina (20%), Gregory_Rosmaita (24%)
- 13:46:00 [Zakim]
- +McCarron
- 13:46:25 [oedipus]
- regrets: Alessio
- 13:46:27 [Steven]
- zakim, dial steven-617
- 13:46:28 [Zakim]
- ok, Steven; the call is being made
- 13:46:30 [Zakim]
- +Steven
- 13:46:32 [oedipus]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 13:46:32 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/10-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
- 13:46:58 [oedipus]
- rrsagent, make logs world-visible
- 13:47:11 [Steven]
- zakim, who is here?
- 13:47:11 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Roland, Tina, Gregory_Rosmaita, McCarron, Steven
- 13:47:12 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see oedipus, Roland, Zakim, RRSAgent, Tina, Steven
- 13:47:30 [oedipus]
- Previous: http://www.w3.org/2008/09/03-xhtml-minutes.html
- 13:47:33 [oedipus]
- rrsagent, make logs world-visible
- 13:47:37 [oedipus]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 13:47:37 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/10-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
- 13:48:02 [oedipus]
- TOPIC: Agenda Shaping and Announcements
- 13:48:23 [oedipus]
- SP: search for MarkB - sent 2 posts to emailing list in last 24 hours
- 13:48:28 [oedipus]
- SP: shall i chair
- 13:48:31 [oedipus]
- RM: please do
- 13:48:58 [oedipus]
- SP: TPAC registration: 6 weeks to go
- 13:49:13 [oedipus]
- SP: still room for presentations on TP day for those who wish to propose a presentation
- 13:49:24 [oedipus]
- SP: RDFa is now a PR - congratulations and thanks to shane
- 13:49:45 [Zakim]
- -McCarron
- 13:50:27 [oedipus]
- SP: Tina, from M12n acknowledgements as "Greytower Technologies"
- 13:50:30 [oedipus]
- TH: correct
- 13:50:37 [oedipus]
- SP: GJR as "invited expert"
- 13:50:40 [oedipus]
- GJR: correct
- 13:51:25 [oedipus]
- SP: timeline - 1) Schema Review - would like at least shane to be around
- 13:51:42 [oedipus]
- SP: markB sent review to list - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Sep/0006.html
- 13:51:51 [oedipus]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Sep/0007.html
- 13:52:14 [Zakim]
- +ShaneM
- 13:52:30 [oedipus]
- TOPIC: Schema Review
- 13:52:41 [oedipus]
- SP: MarkB seems to only have positive review
- 13:52:56 [oedipus]
- RM: no feedback, just acknowledgement that read and reviewed
- 13:53:14 [oedipus]
- TH: want to re-read next iteration
- 13:53:20 [oedipus]
- SP: deadline for comments is this friday
- 13:53:27 [Steven]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Aug/0044.html
- 13:53:43 [oedipus]
- SP: asked to discuss specific items mark thinks we need not worry about
- 13:53:59 [oedipus]
- SP: decided not to get too worked up about assertions
- 13:54:12 [oedipus]
- SP: think we can just send confirmation and thanks for asking us to review
- 13:54:16 [oedipus]
- RM: sounds good
- 13:54:16 [ShaneM]
- ShaneM has joined #xhtml
- 13:54:18 [oedipus]
- TH: plus 1
- 13:54:21 [oedipus]
- GJR: plus 1
- 13:54:49 [oedipus]
- RESOLVED: send Schema confirmation that XHTML2 WG reviewed, thanks for opportunity, no comments
- 13:54:57 [oedipus]
- TOPIC: M12n Status
- 13:55:08 [oedipus]
- SP: shane -- only thing left acknowledgements?
- 13:55:19 [oedipus]
- SM: not ready to publish yet
- 13:55:21 [oedipus]
- SP: when?
- 13:55:32 [oedipus]
- SM: thought yesterday, so probably today
- 13:55:46 [oedipus]
- SP: ping me when ready and will send off necessary email
- 13:56:11 [oedipus]
- SP: ready to get stamp of approval after making sure draft is in final shape
- 13:56:21 [oedipus]
- TOPIC: XML Base Comments
- 13:56:48 [oedipus]
- SP: comments should have gone to both XForms and XHTML - reply only to XForms
- 13:56:59 [oedipus]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Sep/0005
- 13:57:19 [Steven]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Sep/0015
- 13:57:22 [oedipus]
- SP: comment 1: clarification of URI - XML Base relationship to CURIEs
- 13:58:01 [Steven]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Sep/0018.html
- 13:58:01 [oedipus]
- SP: reply suggests that it is up to XML Vocabulary to decide what is URL - good answer, but need to say so in spec; emailed asking if could just state declaratively -- seem to have said "yes"
- 13:58:18 [oedipus]
- SP: added comment which answers our comment perfectly well; accept?
- 13:58:33 [oedipus]
- SM: what does this mean for RDFa?
- 13:58:42 [oedipus]
- SP: if we say it applies, then it applies
- 13:58:47 [oedipus]
- GJR: plus 1 to that
- 13:59:02 [oedipus]
- SP: a CURIE should end up being relative URI once pre-processing done
- 13:59:11 [oedipus]
- SM: in grammars that accept XML Base
- 13:59:14 [oedipus]
- SP: yes, of course
- 13:59:23 [Steven]
- zakim, who is noisy?
- 13:59:35 [Zakim]
- Steven, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Tina (57%)
- 13:59:47 [Steven]
- zakim, mute tina
- 13:59:47 [Zakim]
- Tina should now be muted
- 13:59:59 [oedipus]
- SP: good answer - just say thank you for doing this
- 14:00:23 [oedipus]
- SP: just received reply - why not accept w3c position on what constitutes a URI - conflict between syntax space and value space
- 14:01:01 [oedipus]
- SP: don't mention value space, but that is answer we want -- answer is just "yes" if CURIE allowed as URI, then Base applies
- 14:01:06 [oedipus]
- RM: plus 1
- 14:01:07 [Tina]
- +1
- 14:01:08 [oedipus]
- GJR: plus 1
- 14:01:25 [oedipus]
- SP: comment 2: accepted (add example)
- 14:01:29 [Steven]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Sep/0013.html
- 14:01:40 [Steven]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Sep/0014.html
- 14:01:49 [markbirbeck]
- markbirbeck has joined #xhtml
- 14:02:04 [oedipus]
- SP: comment 3: missing definition - comment about change list - URI reference change in RFC number, but not referenced in text
- 14:02:16 [oedipus]
- SP: replied that it is only in the references
- 14:02:32 [oedipus]
- SP: not sure value of reference only in references, but on other hand is harmless
- 14:02:40 [cbottoml]
- cbottoml has joined #xhtml
- 14:02:48 [oedipus]
- RM: can waste some time figuring it out - put it in, so what is reason it is there?
- 14:02:55 [oedipus]
- SP: look at spec again
- 14:03:36 [oedipus]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlbase/
- 14:03:43 [oedipus]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/PER-xmlbase-20080320/
- 14:04:26 [oedipus]
- SM: clear reference
- 14:04:29 [oedipus]
- SP: ok
- 14:04:41 [Steven]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Sep/0015.html
- 14:04:43 [oedipus]
- SP: commment 4: existing applications may break
- 14:05:31 [oedipus]
- SP: may have been misunderstanding on our part - thought changing def of URI in Base (what is allowed in XML Base attribute) - was this change allowed to make to make PER rather than cycling through LC
- 14:06:09 [oedipus]
- SP: response: never case XML Base values are URIs - change is not a normative change - change in reference
- 14:06:44 [oedipus]
- RM: seems ok response to me
- 14:06:56 [oedipus]
- SP: no other issues to reply to
- 14:07:20 [oedipus]
- ACTION: Steven - reply to XML Base comment replies
- 14:07:26 [oedipus]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 14:07:26 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/10-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
- 14:07:42 [oedipus]
- TOPIC: Tina's Primer
- 14:07:48 [Tina]
- Zakim: unmute Tina
- 14:07:53 [Steven]
- ack tina
- 14:07:57 [oedipus]
- zakim, unmute Tina
- 14:07:57 [Zakim]
- Tina was not muted, oedipus
- 14:09:16 [oedipus]
- TH: background: freenodes web channel - started writing XHTML primer that is value neutral vis a vis values and principles; been writing up, took time but last draft done yesterday
- 14:10:08 [oedipus]
- TH: meant to be introduction to XHTML - explain where fits into web of today without taking political stance either way - suggests way of doing content negotiation, a bit of history and bit of detail; will end up in topic of #web channel at freenodes
- 14:10:18 [oedipus]
- TH: happy with it - more comments appreciated
- 14:10:22 [oedipus]
- SP: all should review it
- 14:10:30 [Tina]
- http://www.dev-archive.net/articles/xhtml.html
- 14:10:42 [oedipus]
- ACTION: Working Group - review Tina's XHTML primer
- 14:10:58 [oedipus]
- TH: already passed by shane
- 14:11:41 [oedipus]
- TH: need to revise with a bit about schema -- how to use to define if element can be child
- 14:11:48 [oedipus]
- TH: all comments good or bad, direct to me
- 14:11:49 [Tina]
- tina@greytower.net
- 14:12:07 [oedipus]
- TH: hold back on publication for a week so can make changes
- 14:12:11 [oedipus]
- RM: where published?
- 14:12:53 [oedipus]
- TH: dev-archive -- took over css.nu (CSS info site) -- publishing documents there that aren't related to any specific company - neutral place to publish articles and documents
- 14:13:16 [oedipus]
- TH: will stay at URL but not yet in index or atom feeds (http://www.dev-archive.net/articles/xhtml.html)
- 14:13:34 [oedipus]
- TH: genesis: flame wars over XHTML - a lot of misunderstanding;
- 14:13:36 [oedipus]
- SP: good work
- 14:14:00 [oedipus]
- SP: part of spearhead action to undo some of the dammage done to XHTML through misinformation and misunderstanding
- 14:15:33 [oedipus]
- SP: W3C at TPAC last year, presenter said 0.0% pages on web using XHTML -- spun the data - applications not served as appllication/xml but text/html when comes down pipe; analysis of pages on web found approximately half announcing themselves as XHTML; would be good if can make some announcement of that - 15% of top 20 web servers serve XHTML to undo some of the dammage
- 14:15:54 [oedipus]
- SP: even had to disabuse TBL of XHTML as failure canard
- 14:16:13 [oedipus]
- RM: what is it and why? a lot of pages not valid - why claim XHTML - what looking for in XHTML?
- 14:16:52 [oedipus]
- SP: part of problem is UAs don't validate, so no message it is wrong; like a compiler - same attitude to web pages - chuck at browser and if works as intended, everyone is ok
- 14:17:17 [oedipus]
- RM: BBC site comes out of often malformed server side
- 14:17:50 [oedipus]
- TH: if send as XHTML this will happen, if send as text/html this will happen; a lot of use of XHTML as HTML which results in poor pages
- 14:17:56 [oedipus]
- SP: hard to get feedback that it is wrong
- 14:18:30 [oedipus]
- TH: need to explain that need to know what is doing with XHTML; XHTML Transitional doctype is being treated as HTML4; all authors know is use XHTML
- 14:18:53 [oedipus]
- SP: similar to unicode - if character set is utf-8, many think have done their work, which isn't the case
- 14:19:20 [oedipus]
- TH: point of article - need to know what you are doing when using XHTML - here is what you need to know
- 14:19:46 [oedipus]
- TH: any comments, please send to me -- be as critical as necessary -- going to keep neutral
- 14:20:16 [oedipus]
- SP: if not valid, it is not XHTML - no, is incorrect XHTML, but still XHTML;
- 14:20:38 [oedipus]
- TH: problem with sending XHTML as HTML, XML parser doesn't get near it -- in that context it is HTML
- 14:21:11 [oedipus]
- SP: as long as intention of page is adhered to, don't serve things as XHTML for browsers, but for XML pipeline that allows XML output at end
- 14:21:34 [oedipus]
- RM: what are people's primary motivation? source serving PoV or delivery PoV
- 14:21:42 [oedipus]
- TH: dev-access uses XHTML
- 14:22:27 [oedipus]
- TH: transform XHTML using XSLT on dev-access
- 14:22:47 [oedipus]
- TH: most people don't need XHTML to start with - large educational problem involved
- 14:23:11 [oedipus]
- TH: have to get people to stop saying XHTML is evil - when used for purpose for which it was designed
- 14:23:43 [oedipus]
- [fyi] Open Accessibility uses XHTML as normative format (so can support ARIA and RDFa)
- 14:23:56 [oedipus]
- TH: a lot of people want absolutes
- 14:24:15 [oedipus]
- SM: XHTML mime discussion?
- 14:24:18 [oedipus]
- SP: yes
- 14:24:32 [oedipus]
- TOPIC: XHTML Mime Type
- 14:25:19 [oedipus]
- SM: have comment from simon peiters...
- 14:25:24 [oedipus]
- TH: link to comment?
- 14:25:29 [Steven]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Sep/0000.html
- 14:25:51 [oedipus]
- SM: very long comment
- 14:25:59 [oedipus]
- SP: summarize how we should deal with comment
- 14:27:57 [oedipus]
- SM: what is obligation - have to respond, but not address or satisfy all comments if cannot be satisfied?
- 14:28:07 [oedipus]
- SP: have to check process on notes
- 14:28:12 [oedipus]
- TH: can we simply thank him?
- 14:28:21 [oedipus]
- RM: ought to take them on board
- 14:28:42 [oedipus]
- TH: take points aboard
- 14:28:56 [oedipus]
- SP: wrong about RFC 2119 terms -
- 14:29:03 [oedipus]
- SM: talking about document, not abstract
- 14:29:14 [oedipus]
- SP: says "this abstract sucks. it shouldn't use RFC 2119 terms"
- 14:29:32 [oedipus]
- SM: document not normative, so nothing should be normative is basis of comments, i believe
- 14:29:54 [ShaneM]
- zakim, mute Tina
- 14:29:54 [Zakim]
- Tina should now be muted
- 14:30:17 [oedipus]
- SP: dusting off to reflect experience with UAs knowing what to do with XML; summary should say "should" because is quote from specificiations
- 14:30:24 [oedipus]
- SP: first comment i disagree with
- 14:30:42 [oedipus]
- SM: next comment: "not normative" don't reference RFC 2119 -- remove and use non-RFC 2119 terms
- 14:30:56 [oedipus]
- RM: if have no reference to RFC 2119, than "should" is just plain english
- 14:31:13 [Tina]
- The question is: does the use of RFC 2119 references *do any harm*? Does it in any way CHANGE the content?
- 14:31:14 [oedipus]
- SP: note's strength is that abstract contains capsule of note
- 14:31:43 [oedipus]
- SP: since SPieters took trouble to comment, should reply in good faith and positively
- 14:32:12 [oedipus]
- SM: from process persepective, for me to go through point-by-point, suggest resolutions and bring back to WG for discussion
- 14:32:21 [oedipus]
- SM: M12n Rec is priority
- 14:32:51 [oedipus]
- ACTION: Shane - review SimonP's comments point-by-point, suggest resolutions and bring back to WG for discussion
- 14:33:36 [oedipus]
- SP: need to wait for reply to comments until move forward
- 14:33:39 [oedipus]
- SM: receive any others?
- 14:33:46 [oedipus]
- SP: no, but did point HTC to it
- 14:33:58 [oedipus]
- RM: HTC call on friday
- 14:34:21 [oedipus]
- TOPIC: Role Module & Comments
- 14:34:22 [oedipus]
- http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtml-role-20080625/
- 14:34:30 [oedipus]
- SP: have we dealt with all the comments on Role?
- 14:34:50 [oedipus]
- SM: requested transition meeting on Role a while ago
- 14:34:57 [oedipus]
- SP: will chase that down
- 14:35:14 [oedipus]
- SM: resolved to request CR on 9 july 2008 - cited in today's agenda
- 14:35:20 [oedipus]
- SP: follow up on that
- 14:35:30 [oedipus]
- SM: dependency on CURIEs was one lingering issue
- 14:35:55 [oedipus]
- TOPIC: CURIEs
- 14:36:39 [oedipus]
- SM: did anyone follow discussion on CURIEs in RDFa task force -- jonathan rhys sent in comments on 30 August 2008 to RDFa task force (not copied to public-xhtml2)
- 14:37:00 [Steven]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Aug/0137.html
- 14:37:02 [oedipus]
- SP: quick ping issue?
- 14:37:03 [oedipus]
- SM: yes
- 14:37:22 [Steven]
- Thread starts here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Aug/0133.html
- 14:38:01 [oedipus]
- SM: issue is JRhys believes need to define in CURIE spec the transformation fucntion to get from curie lexical space to curie value space - requirement of XML Schema Datatypes, so must be done; concrete comment against CURIEs need to resolve before request CR transition
- 14:38:14 [oedipus]
- RM: only for base types, not derived types
- 14:38:22 [oedipus]
- SP: quotes from post
- 14:38:33 [oedipus]
- SM: required telecon to get this resolved in RDFa TF
- 14:38:43 [oedipus]
- RM: built-in types?
- 14:38:52 [oedipus]
- SM: comments about CURIE draft not RDFa
- 14:39:31 [oedipus]
- SP: lexical space of CURIE is well defined syntaxically
- 14:40:04 [oedipus]
- SP: transformed to URI by either sticking the prefix and postfix bits together (concatinating to form URI) - result must be in any URI
- 14:40:06 [oedipus]
- SM: don't say that
- 14:40:10 [oedipus]
- SP: we don't?
- 14:40:20 [oedipus]
- SM: one place say has to be URI in another an IRI
- 14:40:25 [oedipus]
- SM: also say value space is IRI
- 14:40:39 [oedipus]
- SM: isn't XML Schema Datatypes 1.1 IRI is same as URI
- 14:40:53 [oedipus]
- SP: thought IRI was syntaxical/lexical space and URI is value space
- 14:41:00 [oedipus]
- SP: IRI cannot go over wire
- 14:41:07 [oedipus]
- RM: described in URI/IRI spec
- 14:41:26 [oedipus]
- SP: CURIEs transformed to IRI - when IRI gets sent over wire has to be transformed into URI
- 14:41:30 [oedipus]
- SM: out of our hands
- 14:41:44 [oedipus]
- SP: lexical comes from second transformation
- 14:42:08 [oedipus]
- RM: transformation occurs in circumstances other than over-the-wire -- other cases where should be transformed from IRI to URI
- 14:42:22 [oedipus]
- SP: IRI defines relationship
- 14:42:33 [oedipus]
- SP: what does RDF expect? URIs or IRIs?
- 14:42:36 [oedipus]
- SM: expects URIs
- 14:42:44 [oedipus]
- SM: doesn't anticipate existence of IRIs
- 14:43:42 [oedipus]
- SM: they are tokens, so almost doesn't matter; IRIs are lexical space in real world, and there is not a 1 to 1 mapping from IRI to URI - not isomorphic - many to one mapping -- more than one IRI representation
- 14:43:51 [oedipus]
- SM: URIs are subset of IRIs
- 14:44:12 [oedipus]
- SM: subtle angles-on-head-of-pin stuff -- wont' get this from discussion
- 14:45:02 [oedipus]
- SM: if way to make clearer to get from lexical to value space and requirement of XML Schema than should take comment on
- 14:45:31 [oedipus]
- SP: think i understand comment -- assumed good enough to say concatonate together and form an IRI, but surprised CURIE spec doesn't say that
- 14:45:34 [oedipus]
- SM: it does
- 14:45:38 [oedipus]
- SP: so what is problem?
- 14:46:11 [oedipus]
- SM: not expressed in terms of XML Datatypes - no machine way to express concatonation
- 14:46:31 [oedipus]
- SM: may be why in TAG some have argued for new datatype schema for this
- 14:46:41 [oedipus]
- SM: is a tuple - doesn't concatonate
- 14:46:55 [oedipus]
- SP: minute over -- need to go to another call
- 14:47:10 [oedipus]
- RM: promised TAG by end of september
- 14:47:23 [oedipus]
- SM: won't rush but please cogitate upon this
- 14:47:26 [oedipus]
- ADJOURNED
- 14:47:30 [Zakim]
- -Steven
- 14:47:31 [Zakim]
- -ShaneM
- 14:47:35 [Zakim]
- -Tina
- 14:47:36 [Zakim]
- -Roland
- 14:47:38 [Zakim]
- -Gregory_Rosmaita
- 14:47:38 [Zakim]
- IA_XHTML2()9:45AM has ended
- 14:47:39 [oedipus]
- zakim, please part
- 14:47:39 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #xhtml
- 14:47:39 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Roland, +04670855aaaa, Gregory_Rosmaita, Tina, McCarron, Steven, ShaneM
- 14:48:07 [oedipus]
- present- +04670855aaaa
- 14:48:12 [oedipus]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 14:48:12 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/10-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
- 14:49:11 [oedipus]
- present- McCarron
- 14:49:13 [oedipus]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 14:49:13 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/10-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
- 14:52:08 [Roland]
- Roland has left #xhtml
- 15:03:12 [oedipus]
- rrsagent, please part
- 15:03:12 [RRSAgent]
- I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/10-xhtml-actions.rdf :
- 15:03:12 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Steven - reply to XML Base comment replies [1]
- 15:03:12 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/10-xhtml-irc#T14-07-20
- 15:03:12 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Working Group - review Tina's XHTML primer [2]
- 15:03:12 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/10-xhtml-irc#T14-10-42
- 15:03:12 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Shane - review SimonP's comments point-by-point, suggest resolutions and bring back to WG for discussion [3]
- 15:03:12 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/10-xhtml-irc#T14-32-51