/irc-logs / w3c / #html-wg / 2007-11-29 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Thu Nov 29 00:00:00 2007
  2. # Session Ident: #html-wg
  3. # [00:08] * Quits: gsnedders (gsnedders@86.145.188.131) (Quit: gsnedders)
  4. # [00:12] * Joins: sbuluf (fnpmmu@200.49.132.72)
  5. # [00:25] * Quits: tH (Rob@87.102.34.33) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.79-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.8.0.9/2006120508])
  6. # [00:38] * Quits: hober (ted@68.107.112.172) (Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (devel) (IRC client for Emacs))
  7. # [00:44] * Joins: kingryan (kingryan@66.92.2.56)
  8. # [00:59] * Joins: DougJ (djones4@74.76.28.112)
  9. # [01:14] * Quits: kingryan (kingryan@66.92.2.56) (Quit: kingryan)
  10. # [01:23] * Quits: jgraham (james@81.86.218.70) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  11. # [01:27] * Joins: billyjack (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  12. # [01:27] * Quits: billyjack (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Client exited)
  13. # [01:28] * Quits: hasather (hasather@90.231.107.133) (Quit: leaving)
  14. # [01:33] * Joins: jgraham (jgraham@81.86.218.70)
  15. # [01:34] * Joins: timbl (timbl@65.91.31.66)
  16. # [01:35] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Less talk, more pimp walk.)
  17. # [01:46] * Quits: timbl (timbl@65.91.31.66) (Quit: timbl)
  18. # [02:00] * Joins: hober (ted@68.107.112.172)
  19. # [02:04] * Quits: matt (matt@128.30.52.30) (Quit: matt)
  20. # [02:17] * Joins: olivier (ot@128.30.52.30)
  21. # [02:45] * Parts: DougJ (djones4@74.76.28.112)
  22. # [02:56] * Quits: jane (j@76.170.65.146) (Client exited)
  23. # [02:57] * Joins: jane (j@76.170.65.146)
  24. # [02:59] * Quits: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@129.2.175.74) (Quit: Leaving)
  25. # [03:26] * Quits: billmason (billmason@69.30.57.156) (Quit: .)
  26. # [03:51] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  27. # [03:56] * Quits: aroben_ (aroben@17.203.12.72) (Quit: Leaving)
  28. # [04:13] * Joins: DougJ (djones4@74.76.28.112)
  29. # [04:15] * Quits: DougJ (djones4@74.76.28.112) (Quit: DougJ)
  30. # [05:05] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.103.234) (Quit: mjs)
  31. # [05:07] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.103.234)
  32. # [05:18] * Quits: dbaron (dbaron@63.245.220.241) (Quit: 8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.)
  33. # [05:41] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.103.234) (Quit: mjs)
  34. # [05:41] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.103.234)
  35. # [05:49] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.103.234) (Quit: mjs)
  36. # [06:15] * Quits: jmb (jmb@152.78.68.189) (Ping timeout)
  37. # [06:19] * Joins: jmb (jmb@152.78.68.189)
  38. # [06:22] <MikeSmith> via markp on #whatwg :
  39. # [06:22] <MikeSmith> http://www.crockford.com/html/
  40. # [06:37] <marcos> re: crockford article, I don't understand why you need a version... seems silly.
  41. # [06:38] <marcos> argh.. I'm not reading any more
  42. # [06:38] <marcos> <meta http-equiv=content-script-type content=application/ecmascript> was enough!
  43. # [06:38] <marcos> :P
  44. # [06:39] <MikeSmith> marcos - I wonder if the <module> idea is worth discussion.
  45. # [06:40] <marcos> yeah, maybe... but still don't think it's any better than Iframe... not that he talks about it in any detail
  46. # [06:41] * marcos takes a look at json module
  47. # [06:41] <MikeSmith> I wonder if he has actually read the HTML5 spec (the real one, I mean)
  48. # [06:41] <MikeSmith> or if he is aware of the related work in the Web API WG
  49. # [06:42] <marcos> from skimming, seems that eventsource does what he what he wants
  50. # [06:42] * Joins: mjs (mjs@64.81.48.145)
  51. # [06:50] * MikeSmith re-reads #public-html logs and finds http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/html-wg/20070409
  52. # [06:52] <gavin> you mean #html-wg logs
  53. # [06:53] <MikeSmith> gavin - yeah
  54. # [06:53] <MikeSmith> [[
  55. # [06:53] <MikeSmith> <MikeSmith> was there ever any discussion on the whatwg list of Douglas Crockford's proposal for a <module> tag?
  56. # [06:53] <MikeSmith> <MikeSmith> element
  57. # [06:53] <MikeSmith> <MikeSmith> http://json.org/module
  58. # [06:53] <MikeSmith> <anne> yeah, I think so
  59. # [06:53] <MikeSmith> <anne> but it seems that cross-site XHR and cross document messaging cover both...
  60. # [06:53] <MikeSmith> <MikeSmith> ah, yeah
  61. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <anne> no need for JSONRequest and <module>
  62. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <MikeSmith> yeah, I found the thread and reading it now
  63. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <MikeSmith> anne - Web API WG is working on spec'ing (or adopting spec for) cross-document messaging? or planning to?
  64. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <anne> nope
  65. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <mjs> what is <module>?
  66. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <MikeSmith> mjs - something that Douglas Crockford wrote a proposal for
  67. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <MikeSmith> http://json.org/module
  68. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <MikeSmith> http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2006-October/007522.html
  69. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <mjs> sounds like cross-document messaging will work just as well w/o having to introduce a new element
  70. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <mjs> I wish Doug Crockford would follow HTML standards work more closely if he wants to make proposals like that
  71. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <anne> he made that proposal on the whatwg list ages ago
  72. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <anne> i think since then he's sort of convinced that cross-doc is the way to go
  73. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> <anne> but i'm not entirely sure
  74. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> ]]
  75. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> damn, that's longer than I thought it was
  76. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> sorry
  77. # [06:54] <MikeSmith> anyway, it seems that Doug appears to be not yet convinced
  78. # [06:55] <MikeSmith> and also that my memory really sucks
  79. # [06:55] <marcos> I see
  80. # [06:56] * MikeSmith wanders of to eat lunch, which will hopefully improve his memory for the afternoon
  81. # [06:59] * Quits: heycam` (cam@130.194.72.84) (Quit: bye)
  82. # [07:58] * Joins: tH_ (Rob@87.102.34.33)
  83. # [07:58] * tH_ is now known as tH
  84. # [08:06] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@67.160.250.192)
  85. # [08:27] <Hixie> the one thing that d crockford does advocate which i think we will need is data channels that can take data channel end points as data. that basically allows you to create caps-aware components, which would solve many problems.
  86. # [08:29] <mjs> socket passing?
  87. # [08:32] <mjs> (analogue of)
  88. # [08:34] <Hixie> yeah
  89. # [08:36] <mjs> clearly we must amend the charter right away to include this concept
  90. # [08:38] <Hixie> i don't think we should do it in 5.0
  91. # [08:38] <Hixie> we have zero browser experience with the idea
  92. # [08:38] <mjs> true
  93. # [08:39] <mjs> it sounds promising but not solid enough to be a (relatively) late feature addition
  94. # [08:39] <Hixie> yeah
  95. # [08:39] <Hixie> i do think it'd be a good thing for a browser to experiment with though (or gears, or a firefox extension)
  96. # [08:48] <MikeSmith> he writes "... _common capability communication_ mechanism that I am advocating for Google Gears and Adobe AIR"
  97. # [08:48] <MikeSmith> "common capability communication" in ital
  98. # [08:48] <Hixie> yeah that's what i'm referring to
  99. # [08:49] <MikeSmith> search for "common capability communication" turns up zip for me except reddit link to his article
  100. # [08:50] <MikeSmith> so seems like he's not advocated for that publicly, or at least not using that term
  101. # [08:52] <MikeSmith> as an aside, I kinda wonder at times what others at Yahoo think about his evangelism of Gears
  102. # [08:52] <MikeSmith> or maybe evangelism is too strong a word
  103. # [08:52] <MikeSmith> but he does seem to mention it a lot, and always favorably
  104. # [08:54] <MikeSmith> Hixie - btw, do you reckon that having an standard for something Workerpool-like is doable in HTML5 v1?
  105. # [09:10] <MikeSmith> anne - maybe would be good to have a link to the HTML Design Principles doc on html5.org
  106. # [09:11] <MikeSmith> trackbot-ng, please close ACTION-6
  107. # [09:11] <MikeSmith> trackbot-ng, close ACTION-6
  108. # [09:11] * trackbot-ng attempting to close ACTION-6.
  109. # [09:11] <trackbot-ng> ACTION-6 Create script for building PDF version of HTML5 spec using Prince closed
  110. # [09:11] <MikeSmith> trackbot-ng, thanks for finally making yourself marginally useful
  111. # [09:13] <shepazu> lol
  112. # [09:15] <Hixie> MikeSmith: "common capability communication" is just a description of what he means, caps-based communication is a pretty well-defined area (though maybe mostly theoretical at the moment)
  113. # [09:15] <MikeSmith> ah, OK
  114. # [09:16] * Quits: olivier (ot@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Leaving)
  115. # [09:16] <Hixie> MikeSmith: i think we're better off pushing worker pools to a 5.x or 6.0 release (or to a webapi spec), they're going to need some pretty detailed new prose and interfaces
  116. # [09:16] <Hixie> MikeSmith: it's also hard to do them before we have caps-based comms or something similar
  117. # [09:17] <Philip> Is http://code.google.com/p/google-caja/ related to that capabilities idea?
  118. # [09:17] <MikeSmith> Hixie - I see. I guess this does seem like something that would benefit from some browser-implementor experimentation before attempting a standard spec
  119. # [09:20] <MikeSmith> Philip - I see 27 November date on the Caja spec. Is that reflect it being a new project, or just that's the latest update?
  120. # [09:20] * MikeSmith doesn't recognize any of the names on the spec
  121. # [09:20] <MikeSmith> maybe Ben Laurie
  122. # [09:21] <MikeSmith> yeah
  123. # [09:21] <Philip> MikeSmith: The discussion group appears to go back to 30 October
  124. # [09:24] <Hixie> oh is caja public now? yes, that's very much along the lines of what i mentioned. some of the people on that team used to work with douglas
  125. # [09:30] <mjs> MikeSmith: worker pools need a tight definition of what the global scope looks like and which things may work differently than if used on the main thread
  126. # [09:31] <Hixie> worker pools are a three-month project for an experienced spec editor, imho, not counting resolving minor issues in response to later feedback
  127. # [09:35] <MikeSmith> mjs - worker pools seem to help solve some of the fundamental security problems, and if we go by the rule that solving security problems early should always be a priority, I wonder if it's worth trying to drive work on spec'ing and implementing it in the HTML 5.0 time frame
  128. # [09:36] <MikeSmith> Hixie also (above)
  129. # [09:36] <mjs> MikeSmith: I don't think worker pools are really a security solution
  130. # [09:36] <mjs> or at least, that's not the intent
  131. # [09:36] <MikeSmith> OK
  132. # [09:36] <mjs> they are intended to be a concurrency solution
  133. # [09:37] <MikeSmith> right, I do understand that part
  134. # [09:37] <mjs> to avoid blocking the UI with long-running compuation, use convenient sync I/O APIs, and take advantage of increasingly multi-core / multi-cpu hardware
  135. # [09:37] <MikeSmith> about not blocking the UI behavior
  136. # [09:37] <mjs> I think it is a good idea
  137. # [09:37] <mjs> hard to design and implement properly as a core browser feature
  138. # [09:37] <MikeSmith> hmm, OK
  139. # [09:37] <mjs> if we decide to go for it in WebKit, I will give Hixie fair warning
  140. # [09:37] <mjs> many things in a browser are designed around web content mostly doing stuff in a single thread of execution
  141. # [09:38] <mjs> but fortunately Gears worker pools have a good design, shared-nothing threads with message-passing
  142. # [09:39] <MikeSmith> It will be interesting to see what developers end up doing with Gears
  143. # [09:42] * MikeSmith wonders if there is a list somewhere of apps that are actually using Gears (other than Reader)
  144. # [09:44] <Hixie> i agree that worker pools would be good, and the earlier we do them, the better
  145. # [09:44] <Hixie> i just don't think we have the resources to do them at the moment
  146. # [09:44] <Hixie> (standards-wise)
  147. # [09:45] <MikeSmith> I see
  148. # [09:47] * MikeSmith wonders what creative ways could be tried to get some HTML WG and Web API member organizations to volunteer skilled people for spec editing
  149. # [09:48] <Hixie> there are a number of specs far more urgently needed that are in need of editors in webapi
  150. # [09:48] <Hixie> which would be far easier to write than worker pools would
  151. # [09:48] <MikeSmith> yeah
  152. # [09:48] <Hixie> like keyboard events, dom3 events, web dom core, setTimeout, CSSOM...
  153. # [09:49] <Hixie> bindings for dom...
  154. # [09:49] <Hixie> (some of those have putative editors, but they haven't actually done anything in the past few weeks, so...)
  155. # [09:50] <MikeSmith> Yeah, we need to have some good way to punish the wayward editors
  156. # [09:50] <MikeSmith> some stick, along with the carrot
  157. # [09:54] <hober> How many member organizations pay qualified engineers to full-time spec-write?
  158. # [09:55] <MikeSmith> Actually, I'm not sure sometimes what the carrot is this case or how appealing it is; i.e., "Hey! You get to spend months (years) working on writing and tweaking a spec for API X and dealing with potentially massive numbers of comments (including last-call comments) each of which you are expected to take time to respond to in good faith, before it can all be blessed."
  159. # [09:55] <MikeSmith> hober - very few it seems
  160. # [09:55] <MikeSmith> very very few
  161. # [09:55] <hober> right
  162. # [09:55] <hober> I mean, it seems like "lack of qualified and available editors" is a problem readily solved by sufficiently endowed w3c member organizations
  163. # [09:56] <Hixie> actually finding qualified editors is a real problem
  164. # [09:56] <Hixie> there just aren't that many
  165. # [09:56] <Hixie> i've tried finding some to hire, and have basically failed
  166. # [09:57] <hober> Sure. The 90-9-1 breakdown is something like "90% unwilling and unqualified, 9% willing but unqualified, 1% willing and qualified"
  167. # [09:57] <mjs> there's definitely people who are qualified and unwilling
  168. # [09:57] <Hixie> most of the qualified ones are unwilling in this market
  169. # [09:57] <mjs> (due to time constraints)
  170. # [09:57] <Hixie> mjs: also because they know it's a hell of a job
  171. # [09:57] <mjs> that too :-)
  172. # [09:57] <Hixie> same reason i'm qualified to do browser QA but try to do as little of it as possible
  173. # [09:58] <MikeSmith> and I would think the pool of potential spec writers for work related to browsing technologies would be made of largely of people who have probably already been at least somewhat involved in discussions of the HTML5 work and Web API work
  174. # [09:58] <mjs> same reason I'm qualified to do browser engine development by try to -- no, wait, I do it all the time
  175. # [09:58] <mjs> damn
  176. # [09:58] <Hixie> MikeSmith: i think we personally met most of those people in boston
  177. # [09:58] <mjs> it's a hell of a job, but somebody's gotta do it
  178. # [09:58] <Hixie> mjs: that's my approach with spec work :-)
  179. # [09:58] <MikeSmith> clearly what we need here is some kind of cloning device
  180. # [09:59] <Hixie> not sure who you'd want to clone, but at least cloning me wouldn't work
  181. # [09:59] <MikeSmith> let's stop work on HTML5 and get to work on cloning technology
  182. # [09:59] <hober> MikeSmith: actually, public-html would be much more pleasant with lots of hixie clones contributing. :)
  183. # [09:59] <Hixie> since all the clones would want to work on the same part of the same spec :-P
  184. # [09:59] <MikeSmith> heh
  185. # [10:00] <MikeSmith> like when Calvin clones himself to get out of doing his homework and his clone also refuses to do homework, so they make another clone, and another, etc.
  186. # [10:00] <mjs> Hixie: I suspect environmental influence might be enough to make the clones work on slightly different parts
  187. # [10:00] <hober> MikeSmith: yes, exactly what I was thinking of
  188. # [10:02] <MikeSmith> mjs - everybody knows browser development is a joyride
  189. # [10:02] <MikeSmith> especially the bug fixing
  190. # [10:02] <MikeSmith> and the regressions
  191. # [10:02] <Philip> You get to participate in all the fun browser conspiracies
  192. # [10:02] <mjs> MikeSmith: it's almost as exciting as driving a ferarri... into a brick wall
  193. # [10:03] * Joins: zcorpan (zcorpan@88.131.66.80)
  194. # [10:11] <MikeSmith> trackbot-ng, close ACTION-10
  195. # [10:11] * trackbot-ng attempting to close ACTION-10.
  196. # [10:11] <trackbot-ng> ACTION-10 Integrate into the Nov. 2007 meeting record the notes that Joshue took during the 2007-11-10 ARIA discussion closed
  197. # [10:16] <MikeSmith> btw, an important decision I made in the last couple days is to try to recruit Kool Keith as the new King of Web Standards
  198. # [10:17] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@84.215.41.149) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  199. # [10:18] <Philip> Sadly I have missed out on ever having heard of him before now :-(
  200. # [10:21] <MikeSmith> Philip - you are indeed missing out if you don't know about the many worlds of Kool Keith
  201. # [10:22] <MikeSmith> in case you also missed the excitement of "Blue Beanie Day":
  202. # [10:22] <MikeSmith> http://www.flickr.com/photos/sideshowbarker/2067348343/in/pool-bluebeanieday2007/
  203. # [10:22] <MikeSmith> http://www.flickr.com/photos/sideshowbarker/2067567428/in/pool-bluebeanieday2007/
  204. # [10:22] <MikeSmith> my contributions to that great day in history
  205. # [10:29] <Philip> I am somewhat out of touch with these aspects of the world, I'm afraid
  206. # [10:29] <Philip> Oops, I have to leave five minutes ago
  207. # [10:32] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22)
  208. # [10:32] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22) (Client exited)
  209. # [10:33] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22)
  210. # [10:33] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22) (Client exited)
  211. # [10:33] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22)
  212. # [10:34] * Joins: ROBOd (robod@89.122.216.38)
  213. # [10:42] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22) (Quit: Leaving)
  214. # [10:42] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22)
  215. # [10:42] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22) (Client exited)
  216. # [10:42] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22)
  217. # [11:03] <MikeSmith> ACTION-19?
  218. # [11:03] * trackbot-ng getting information on ACTION-19
  219. # [11:03] <trackbot-ng> ACTION-19 -- Michael(tm) Smith to work with editors to publish design principles draft -- due 2007-11-22 -- OPEN
  220. # [11:03] <trackbot-ng> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/19
  221. # [11:07] <MikeSmith> trackbot-ng, close ACTION-19
  222. # [11:07] * trackbot-ng attempting to close ACTION-19.
  223. # [11:07] <trackbot-ng> ACTION-19 work with editors to publish design principles draft closed
  224. # [11:17] <hsivonen> Hixie's framing of the FPWD issue on the list makes sense to me
  225. # [11:19] <mjs> me too
  226. # [11:19] <mjs> will probably comment on list later
  227. # [11:19] <mjs> I reread the patent policy today
  228. # [11:19] <mjs> and it seems to me that contents of the charter are completely irrelevant to the patent policy
  229. # [11:19] <mjs> and that review of the FWPD is required no matter what it contains or what the charter says
  230. # [11:20] <MikeSmith> hsivonen - you mean http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0423.html ?
  231. # [11:20] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: yes
  232. # [11:42] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@67.160.250.192) (Quit: aroben)
  233. # [11:49] * Quits: sbuluf (fnpmmu@200.49.132.72) (Quit: sbuluf)
  234. # [11:57] * Parts: andreas (andreasb@213.236.208.22)
  235. # [12:10] <MikeSmith> close ACTION-5
  236. # [12:10] * trackbot-ng attempting to close ACTION-5.
  237. # [12:10] <trackbot-ng> ACTION-5 Make a proposal on the mailing list for the creation of a task force for developer community outreach closed
  238. # [12:11] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Less talk, more pimp walk.)
  239. # [12:51] <anne> zcorpan, in http://simon.html5.org/specs/xml-stylesheet5 you want "and is before the root element" instead of "not after"
  240. # [12:51] <anne> as for letting it depend on the HTML-ness flag, I guess we can try to remove that variable
  241. # [13:03] <zcorpan> anne: what if there isn't a root element?
  242. # [13:03] <zcorpan> yet
  243. # [13:04] <zcorpan> or what's wrong with "not after"?
  244. # [13:08] <anne> <root><?xml-stylesheet ...?> ... </root> <?xml-stylesheet ...?>
  245. # [13:08] <anne> only the second is after, but neither should be applied
  246. # [13:09] <anne> "and is before the root element (if any)"
  247. # [13:17] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  248. # [13:17] <anne> btw, for XSLT it should probably ignore all but the first PI and only adhere href=
  249. # [13:19] <zcorpan> the first isn't child of the Document
  250. # [13:19] <zcorpan> so isn't applied
  251. # [13:19] <zcorpan> yep (re xslt)
  252. # [13:19] <anne> ah, child of Document, missed that
  253. # [13:19] <MikeSmith> Has anybody seen oedipus (Gregory Rosmaita) on here lately?
  254. # [13:20] <MikeSmith> seems like his used to be around but not recently
  255. # [13:20] <anne> you still need to add (if any) to cover the case of not having a root element
  256. # [13:20] <anne> I believe he is only around during telcons
  257. # [13:20] <MikeSmith> anne - kthx
  258. # [13:21] <MikeSmith> close ACTION-26
  259. # [13:21] * trackbot-ng attempting to close ACTION-26.
  260. # [13:21] <trackbot-ng> ACTION-26 Work on getting a VCS system set up for storing test cases, by 2007-11-29 closed
  261. # [13:23] <zcorpan> anne: how can it be after the root element when there is no root element? :)
  262. # [13:24] <zcorpan> but i can change the wording to make it clearer
  263. # [13:25] <anne> yeah, it's just that the sentence implies there is a root element
  264. # [13:27] <zcorpan> ok. true
  265. # [13:31] <anne> it would also help I think if the draft mentioned "processing instruction" once
  266. # [13:39] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Ping timeout)
  267. # [13:44] <zcorpan> yeah. i'll make the spec readable in due course :)
  268. # [13:51] * Joins: smedero (smedero@158.130.16.191)
  269. # [13:58] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  270. # [14:05] <smedero> MikeSmith: you are knocking off the ACTIONS today man. go you.
  271. # [14:06] <MikeSmith> smedero - most of them mine own, and overdue
  272. # [14:07] <MikeSmith> so a preemptive strike to avoid getting strafed during the call for having overdue action items
  273. # [14:08] <MikeSmith> and deflect the attention toward all the other slackers who have overdue ones
  274. # [14:11] <smedero> hahaha
  275. # [14:11] * smedero glances over his shoulder... is safe from ACTIONS at the moment.
  276. # [14:12] <smedero> (though I do have some ISSUES i'd like to add... got clear off my real-life job actions first.)
  277. # [14:12] * smedero yawns
  278. # [14:12] <smedero> coffee time
  279. # [14:12] * Joins: matt (matt@128.30.52.30)
  280. # [14:22] <Philip> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=405584 - "our preferred browser made all the navigation Icons in out Oracle backed web applications break", hmm, they use <canvas> for that?
  281. # [14:25] <Philip> I guess these people are all relying on Excanvas for IE, which is quite a scary thought
  282. # [14:30] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.227.30.12) (Ping timeout)
  283. # [14:41] * Quits: matt (matt@128.30.52.30) (Quit: matt)
  284. # [14:54] * Philip hopes IE would be able to implement <canvas> without breaking people who are assuming they'll always get Excanvas behaviour in IE
  285. # [14:59] <zcorpan> should work fine with their versioning idea, no? :)
  286. # [15:07] <DanC> MikeSmith, http://www.w3.org/2007/11/10-html-wg-minutes.html#item03 is missing an action on me to draft a liaison with microformats.org , yes?
  287. # [15:07] <DanC> is the edited IRC log around?
  288. # [15:07] <MikeSmith> reopen ACTION-5
  289. # [15:07] * trackbot-ng attempting to re-open ACTION-5.
  290. # [15:07] <trackbot-ng> ACTION-5 Make a proposal on the mailing list for the creation of a task force for developer community outreach re-opened
  291. # [15:08] <DanC> does it grok "continue ACTION-5", i.e. set the due date to the date of the next meeting?
  292. # [15:08] <DanC> trackbot-ng, help?
  293. # [15:08] <DanC> :-/
  294. # [15:08] <MikeSmith> DanC - no clue on what those minutes might be missing, but IRC log is in the usual place
  295. # [15:09] <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/2007/11/10-html-wg-irc.txt
  296. # [15:09] <DanC> that log has any edits you made?
  297. # [15:09] <MikeSmith> DanC - trackbot-ng don't grok continue afaik
  298. # [15:09] <MikeSmith> one "close" and "reopen" verbs
  299. # [15:09] <MikeSmith> I made no edits to the raw logs
  300. # [15:10] <MikeSmith> only the generated minutes
  301. # [15:10] <DanC> oh.
  302. # [15:10] <DanC> ok
  303. # [15:10] <DanC> where are you getting the list of verbs?
  304. # [15:11] * MikeSmith looks for e-mail message from Dom
  305. # [15:12] <MikeSmith> DanC - mail today on w3t-sys
  306. # [15:13] <MikeSmith> you want the URL for archived version?
  307. # [15:15] <DanC> no
  308. # [15:16] <DanC> ACTION: Dan to draft a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with microformats.org regarding @rel values
  309. # [15:16] * trackbot-ng noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
  310. # [15:16] <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-27 - Draft a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with microformats.org regarding @rel values [on Dan Connolly - due 2007-12-06].
  311. # [15:19] <DanC> did Sam Ruby review offline web apps?
  312. # [15:21] * Joins: matt (matt@128.30.52.30)
  313. # [15:23] <MikeSmith> DanC - not as far as I can remember
  314. # [15:24] <DanC> I just reviewed public-html mail from Sam Ruby and I don't see it.
  315. # [15:25] * MikeSmith just did the same
  316. # [15:26] <MikeSmith> only 2 message from him since October, both replies to mjs " A bit of electioneering on the <canvas> charter issue " message
  317. # [15:28] <MikeSmith> DanC - no agenda for today's call posted to list yet
  318. # [15:30] <DanC> yes, there was
  319. # [15:30] <DanC> Subject: HTML WG Teleconference 29 November
  320. # [15:30] <DanC> Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 08:47:27 -0800 (10:47 CST)
  321. # [15:31] <DanC> it didn't go to -announce, and it doesn't have "agenda" in the subject; you can fix both of those if you like
  322. # [15:32] <DanC> I think maybe our list of surveys should go in the nav bar on the WG homepage. http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/
  323. # [15:33] <DanC> odd... the tasks survey closed before the formal requirement survey. I think I fat-fingered the dates when I extended the survey
  324. # [15:36] <DanC> ACTION: Dan to consult with the Hypertext CG and W3C management about how much time W3C member organizations should be allowed to study the patent implications of an HTML 5 spec 1st WD
  325. # [15:36] * trackbot-ng noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
  326. # [15:36] <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-28 - Consult with the Hypertext CG and W3C management about how much time W3C member organizations should be allowed to study the patent implications of an HTML 5 spec 1st WD [on Dan Connolly - due 2007-12-06].
  327. # [15:38] <MikeSmith> DanC - I added a Surveys link on http://www.w3.org/html/wg/
  328. # [15:38] <DanC> cool
  329. # [15:39] <MikeSmith> that page is currently in an unfinished state of re-mangling I started on it yesterday and put on the back burner
  330. # [15:42] <DanC> I expect one of us will get an urge to re-mangle it every couple weeks.
  331. # [15:42] <MikeSmith> I changed the heads to blue but olivier and karl then told me some cat named Jakob Nielsen who they seem to sort of worship and whose decrees they accept without question said that blue heads are forbidden
  332. # [15:42] <MikeSmith> but well, I like blue
  333. # [15:42] * DanC is a Nielsen fan too
  334. # [15:42] <DanC> have you read Nielsen's argument?
  335. # [15:43] <MikeSmith> I perused it
  336. # [15:43] * DanC can't find it easily... http://useit.mondosearch.com/cgi-bin/MsmFind.exe?QUERY=blue+heading
  337. # [15:44] <DanC> ah... "Never show text in your chosen link colors unless it's a link" -- http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20040510.html
  338. # [15:44] <MikeSmith> I can of wonder whether Neilsen hasn't drifted way off into Yeah, but what have you done for the Web lately? waters
  339. # [15:44] <MikeSmith> yeah, that's the one I guess
  340. # [15:44] <DanC> huh? http://www.useit.com/ shows no sign of reduced activity
  341. # [15:44] <zcorpan> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9611.html ?
  342. # [15:45] * zcorpan is slow
  343. # [15:45] <MikeSmith> not that activity has reduced, just that relevance of it maybe has
  344. # [15:45] <MikeSmith> dude does not have a monopoly on usability these days
  345. # [15:45] <DanC> I prefer classics like the Chicago manual of style to avante guard like MTV (well, even that is old by now) when it comes to visual design.
  346. # [15:46] <DanC> of course he doesn't have a monopoly; I'm interested to see other similarly well-studied opinions
  347. # [15:46] <MikeSmith> Well I guess I kind of thing usability should not equal boring
  348. # [15:47] * DanC supposes the Chicago manual of style has little to say about visual design... maybe more the New York Museum of Art book
  349. # [15:47] <MikeSmith> I mean, look at the http://www.useit.com/ page design
  350. # [15:47] <MikeSmith> not exactly engaging
  351. # [15:47] <DanC> it's engaging to me.
  352. # [15:47] <DanC> especially when I browse from my phone and other devices.
  353. # [15:48] <DanC> noone (sane) argues for boring; he just argues not to sacrifice usability for glitz.
  354. # [15:48] <DanC> if you can do usable _and_ glitzy, more power to you. but few can.
  355. # [15:48] <MikeSmith> I wonder what kind of music he listens to
  356. # [15:49] <Philip> Kool Keith, perhaps?
  357. # [15:49] * DanC wonders what, if anything, a list apart has to say re "Never show text in your chosen link colors unless it's a link"
  358. # [15:49] <DanC> I haven't read the authoring threads in public-html; are you following those, MikeSmith ?
  359. # [15:50] <MikeSmith> Philip - I will pay you several gazillion dollars if you can confirm that he listens to Kool Keith
  360. # [15:50] <MikeSmith> or if he even, say, knows who DJ QBert is
  361. # [15:51] <MikeSmith> DanC - I read everything on public-html
  362. # [15:51] <MikeSmith> though not always in linear fashion
  363. # [15:51] <DanC> ok, then I trust you'll let me know when the authoring thread merits the attention of the chairs
  364. # [15:51] <MikeSmith> and not every message in depth
  365. # [15:52] <smedero> speaking of A List Apart... I've written for them before and they've asked me to write again. I'm kicking around two article ideas... one being closer to my day job (interface design issues) but the other was taken advantage of the forum and do a state of the union type piece on HTML 5. They seem eager to have something like that.
  366. # [15:52] <MikeSmith> and I read public-html sometimes while listening to Kool Keith
  367. # [15:53] <MikeSmith> which helps a lot
  368. # [15:53] <MikeSmith> me an Philip have a plan to promote Kool Keith as a candidate for the new King of Web Standards
  369. # [15:54] <MikeSmith> DanC - the authoring thread merits the attention of the chairs
  370. # [15:54] <DanC> oh.
  371. # [15:55] <smedero> which thread exactly? :)
  372. # [15:55] <smedero> there are like four going at once according to GMail.
  373. # [15:55] <DanC> how can the chairs help with the authoring thread? is there a critical mass of support building around something? is it a candidate for working draft? or note?
  374. # [15:56] <DanC> I wonder if a series of blog articles might be better
  375. # [15:58] <DanC> Ryan king has a point: "If we were to try and reduce these superficial differences, like
  376. # [15:58] <DanC> single versus double quotes versus unquoted attributes, it comes at
  377. # [15:58] <DanC> the cost of working on deeper differences, like parsing and DOM
  378. # [15:58] <DanC> compatibility."
  379. # [15:58] <MikeSmith> smedero - basically starting here:
  380. # [15:58] <MikeSmith> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0354.html
  381. # [15:58] <DanC> but the cost to the WG of a blog article is much lower; we don't need to develop consensus around it.
  382. # [15:59] <smedero> MikeSmith: Alright, yeah that thread does have some proposals in it.. I think there is another from Doug Jones that pops-up later.
  383. # [15:59] <DanC> MikeSmith? please elaborate on "the authoring thread merits the attention of the chairs"? in what way is the thread not taking care of itself?
  384. # [16:01] <DanC> i gather there's a concrete proposal from Lachy ; I like to assign significant chunks of work to pairs. is Lachy working with anybody closely?
  385. # [16:02] <Lachy> I'm not working closely with anyone in particular
  386. # [16:02] <DanC> hi
  387. # [16:02] * DanC catches up... "
  388. # [16:02] <DanC> I think it would be best if the ultimate goal was to publish a W3C Note"
  389. # [16:02] <MikeSmith> DanC - not sure what it means for a thread to be taking care of itself, but I guess I think any substantive discussions about potential deliverables merit the attention the chairs
  390. # [16:03] <DanC> oh. let me re-set your expectations
  391. # [16:03] <DanC> mostly the WG does the work without the chairs getting directly involved.
  392. # [16:04] <DanC> the chairs only get involved when something turns the corner from the burden being on the proposers to develop support to the burden being on those who want something different to say specifically what changes they want
  393. # [16:04] <DanC> s/only/mostly/
  394. # [16:05] * DanC continues catching up... finds http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/Guide/ ...
  395. # [16:05] <MikeSmith> I guess I see a difference between the chairs getting involved and just paying attention to discussios
  396. # [16:06] <DanC> well, I make it a point to pay attention about as much as I expect the average WG member to pay attention; i.e. I only read a little bit of the email
  397. # [16:06] <Lachy> indeed. I don't think there's anything related to the guide that the chairs need to be involved with yet
  398. # [16:06] * DanC wonders how the wiki guide relates to http://dev.w3.org/html5/html-author/
  399. # [16:07] <Lachy> DanC, I'm using the guide to allow more people to contribute since a wiki can manage many contributors much better than granting everyone CVS access
  400. # [16:07] * DanC wrinkles nose at "1.1. Conventions" ; cf "book with user interface" by philg
  401. # [16:07] <DanC> i.e. http://philip.greenspun.com/wtr/dead-trees/story
  402. # [16:08] <Lachy> basically, things in the wiki are proposals which will eventually get revised and incorporated into the CVS version by me later on
  403. # [16:08] <DanC> a link from http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/Guide/ to http://dev.w3.org/html5/html-author/ seems in order. and vice versa
  404. # [16:09] <DanC> this reminds me of the original HTML spec, back in 1991...
  405. # [16:09] <Lachy> DanC, ok. I'll add that later
  406. # [16:09] <Lachy> is the telcon still on in about an hour?
  407. # [16:09] <DanC> hmm... I wonder where /p and /a and /title went... I thought they were under /MarkUp
  408. # [16:10] <DanC> chris w. is chairing today; it's up to him... I suppose our bridge reservation is for a specific time...
  409. # [16:10] <Lachy> ok
  410. # [16:10] <DanC> bridge reservation is 90 minutes http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#s_2715
  411. # [16:11] <DanC> oh... _in_ about an hour... I thought you were asking about duration
  412. # [16:11] <DanC> 12:00pm-1:30pm/17:00-18:30 UTC
  413. # [16:11] <DanC> that's 2 hours from now, unless I'm screwing up the calculations, again
  414. # [16:12] <DanC> $ date -u
  415. # [16:12] <DanC> Thu Nov 29 15:10:12 UTC 2007
  416. # [16:12] * Philip 's GMT clock agrees with that
  417. # [16:13] <MikeSmith> yeah, 2 hours
  418. # [16:13] <MikeSmith> = 2am MikeSmith time
  419. # [16:14] <MikeSmith> smedero - HTML5 piece published through List Apart would be great to see
  420. # [16:15] <DanC> hmm... I guess they weren't separate pages, just sections on a page... http://www.w3.org/History/19921103-hypertext/hypertext/WWW/MarkUp/Tags.html#4
  421. # [16:16] <DanC> I went to An Event Apart in Chicago in August and talked with Jeff Z about a series of articles on HTML 5, but the idea hasn't gotten much steam since, AFAIK
  422. # [16:17] <DanC> chuckle... "Much of the HTML actually around has been generated by the NeXTStep editor, which has in fact generated bad HTML. This should not confuse the specification. Some bugs in that output include non-matching open and close tags" -- http://www.w3.org/History/19921103-hypertext/hypertext/WWW/MarkUp/Future.html
  423. # [16:18] <DanC> I developed a patch for NCSA mosaic that was basically an XML parser. But I moved to Austin to get married and changed jobs and never sent the patch to NCSA. I often wonder how different the web would be if I had sent it back then.
  424. # [16:18] <MikeSmith> wow... I didn't even know about http://www.w3.org/History/
  425. # [16:19] <DanC> it seems that I did contribute the code to libwww... http://www.w3.org/History/19921103-hypertext/hypertext/WWW/MarkUp/Connolly/MarkUp.html
  426. # [16:20] <MikeSmith> DanC - somehow I suspect we still would have not found ourselves in a rosy wonderland
  427. # [16:20] <DanC> when I get the kinks in my time machine worked out, I'll let you know. ;-)
  428. # [16:21] <MikeSmith> btw, we are also working on cloning technology
  429. # [16:21] <MikeSmith> to produce spec editors
  430. # [16:21] <MikeSmith> and to do our homework for us
  431. # [16:21] <Philip> Is that in our charter?
  432. # [16:22] <MikeSmith> DanC - this /History stuff should be more prominently linked to from somewhere
  433. # [16:22] <MikeSmith> from anywhere
  434. # [16:22] <MikeSmith> how are people expected to find it?
  435. # [16:22] <DanC> people aren't expected to find it.
  436. # [16:22] <MikeSmith> ah
  437. # [16:22] <DanC> people should find the specs on /TR/ and not get confused by archival stuff, mostly.
  438. # [16:23] <DanC> but you should be able to find the W3C@10 stuff, which has a fairly polished view of history
  439. # [16:23] <MikeSmith> well, I think there are a few crazy people who would like to read that stuff
  440. # [16:23] <MikeSmith> and things like the circa 1991 www-talk archives
  441. # [16:23] <DanC> yes, there's a web history cult. it's kinda bizzare, though. do you know about webhistory.org ?
  442. # [16:23] <MikeSmith> yeah
  443. # [16:24] <MikeSmith> sorta
  444. # [16:24] <DanC> the guy came and interviewed a whole bunch of us on video and then never did anything with the material.
  445. # [16:24] <DanC> it really pissed timbl off that he had to start over and do a book himself.
  446. # [16:24] * DanC oops; did I just say that in public?
  447. # [16:25] <MikeSmith> too late now
  448. # [16:25] * DanC oh well
  449. # [16:25] <MikeSmith> candor is encourage on #html-wg
  450. # [16:25] * Joins: myakura (myakura@222.148.7.61)
  451. # [16:26] <MikeSmith> anyway, my interests are not for cultic reasons but more out of "wonder what they were thinking back then" reasons
  452. # [16:26] <DanC> speaking of web history and stuff that I'd like to convince the author to set free... does anybody know how to reach Ted Nelson? I have an HTML version of his "future of information" book based on plain text that he sent me, but we never finished the licensing negotiation
  453. # [16:27] * DanC points MikeSmith at http://www.w3.org/Team/9706/nelson/
  454. # [16:27] * Joins: Julian (chatzilla@217.91.35.233)
  455. # [16:28] <MikeSmith> we should try to get Ted Nelson to comment on HTML5
  456. # [16:28] <MikeSmith> to say anything at all about it, good or bad
  457. # [16:29] <MikeSmith> Though I'm sure it would be bad
  458. # [16:29] <MikeSmith> No idea how to get ahold of him
  459. # [16:29] <MikeSmith> I think he's still working on Xanadu 2
  460. # [16:29] <MikeSmith> or Xanadu 3 by now maybe
  461. # [16:30] <MikeSmith> I like his term "hyperhell" a lot
  462. # [16:31] <MikeSmith> .
  463. # [16:31] * MikeSmith reads http://www.w3.org/Team/9706/nelson/nelson06.html#hyperhells-60 section
  464. # [16:31] <MikeSmith> ted was way ahead of his time
  465. # [16:31] <DanC> there's a lot of great stuff in that book, indeed.
  466. # [16:31] <MikeSmith> even with the version numbers
  467. # [16:31] <DanC> if only he weren't such a piss-ant
  468. # [16:32] <MikeSmith> heh
  469. # [16:32] <MikeSmith> yeah, that's it, in so many words
  470. # [16:32] <DanC> of all the supreme arrogance: note not single citation to anybody else's work in the references section
  471. # [16:33] <MikeSmith> hey, he's got "Andrew Pam, proposed definition of <TXT SRC> tag in HTML." as reference 5 in his bibliography
  472. # [16:34] <MikeSmith> references 1-4 all being by somebody named T. Nelson
  473. # [16:34] <Lachy> damn, 401 unauthorised! :-( Why is that restricted?
  474. # [16:34] <DanC> Lachy, please take out "The Working Group intends to publish this document as a Working Group Note. " until the Working Group has actually said something like that.
  475. # [16:34] <anne> Lachy, it is W3C Team-only
  476. # [16:34] * anne has no idea why though
  477. # [16:34] <DanC> it's restricted because Ted Nelson hasn't given me permission to 200 it
  478. # [16:34] <Lachy> DanC, ok
  479. # [16:35] <Lachy> I'll have to fix it later tonight
  480. # [16:35] <DanC> hmm... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Nelson cites "The Future of Information" (1997) but doesn't give a link
  481. # [16:35] <MikeSmith> amazing that that Ted Nelson wrote so elaborately about collaborative technologies but was not actually interested in collaborating with anybody
  482. # [16:36] <DanC> MikeSmith, speaking of getting Ted Nelson to say something about HTML 5, I got him to say something about XML: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/w3j/s3.nelson.html XML.com: Embedded Markup Considered Harmful
  483. # [16:36] <DanC> he's got impossibly high standards, just like timbl. the difference is that timbl is willing to tolerate less than his ideals.
  484. # [16:37] <DanC> so timbl's web is everywhere, and xanadu is a footnote in wikipedia
  485. # [16:37] <MikeSmith> DanC - that article from Ted doesn't actually mention XML
  486. # [16:37] * DanC really should cut it out with the zingers
  487. # [16:38] <MikeSmith> mentions SGML though
  488. # [16:38] <Lachy> DanC, regarding the document licence issue raised here http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0292.html - is it possible to use a special license for the guide that doesn't have the restrictions that the standard w3c licence has?
  489. # [16:38] * MikeSmith notices that Ted lists "M.A. in Social Relations from Harvard" at the end
  490. # [16:38] <MikeSmith> social relations..
  491. # [16:39] <DanC> perhaps possible, but not straightforward, Lachy . again, that's one of the things that makes me think a series of blog articles might be better than a /TR/ when it comes to authoring guidelines for HTML 5
  492. # [16:39] <DanC> there was an internal discussion of creative commons licenses for W3C tech reports; I don't recall the outcome; do you, MikeSmith ?
  493. # [16:40] * DanC reads 0292...
  494. # [16:40] <Lachy> maybe there's another solution, like mirroring it on whatwg.org with the whatwg licence, just like the spec.
  495. # [16:40] <MikeSmith> DanC - i recall some discussion but I don't recall any resolution
  496. # [16:41] * Joins: billmason (billmason@69.30.57.156)
  497. # [16:41] * MikeSmith wanders off for a bit
  498. # [16:41] <Lachy> DanC, btw, I'm writing an article for A List Apart at the moment. It will be published in the next issue
  499. # [16:41] <DanC> cool
  500. # [16:42] * MikeSmith is now known as TedNelson5
  501. # [16:42] <DanC> mike, can I assign you an action to look into hsivonen 's suggestion to use a DSFG-happy license for HTML 5 authoring guidelines? his point that it's useful for validation tools is spot on.
  502. # [16:43] <DanC> [well, of course I can assign such an action; the question is whether you accept it.]
  503. # [16:43] * Lachy suggested MIT license, though I'd be happy with any similar non-copyleft permissive license
  504. # [16:44] <Lachy> as long as it's GPL-compatible
  505. # [16:44] * DanC looks for other W3C staff members aboot... wonders if Bert has his ears on
  506. # [16:46] * Bert has a headset on...
  507. # [16:46] <DanC> Bert, wanna take an action to follow up on the idea of a free-software-compatible license for a note on HTML authoring, per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0292.html ?
  508. # [16:47] <DanC> I'm sure your plate isn't full enough ;-)
  509. # [16:47] <DanC> hmm... I don't think you're in the issue tracking task force. never mind
  510. # [16:47] <anne> is Bert in the WG, even?
  511. # [16:47] <DanC> I dunno
  512. # [16:48] <Bert> I'm not in the WG, and action items are not things I like to have :-)
  513. # [16:48] <anne> dbwg says no
  514. # [16:48] <DanC> dbwg should know
  515. # [16:48] <Bert> Looks difficult. Nedd to read back up
  516. # [16:48] <DanC> anne, I'd be happy for you to take the action; you could get it done by bugging me and mike
  517. # [16:49] * Joins: aaronlev (chatzilla@66.30.196.151)
  518. # [16:49] * DanC considers "Anne van Kesteren has 0 actions" a bug ;-)
  519. # [16:49] <anne> I can e-mail spec-prod I suppose
  520. # [16:49] <anne> hah
  521. # [16:50] <DanC> trackbot-ng, status
  522. # [16:50] * trackbot-ng knows about the following 15 users: Michael(tm), Anne, Chris, Karl, Shawn, Dan, Michael, David, Charles, Maciej, James, Gregory, David, Ian, Julian
  523. # [16:50] <DanC> ACTION: Anne follow up on the idea of a free-software-compatible license for a note on HTML authoring, per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0292.html
  524. # [16:50] * trackbot-ng noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
  525. # [16:50] <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-29 - Follow up on the idea of a free-software-compatible license for a note on HTML authoring, per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0292.html [on Anne van Kesteren - due 2007-12-06].
  526. # [16:50] <DanC> mailing me and mike with copy to spec-prod is a fine way to start
  527. # [16:52] <Lachy> anne, can you CC me too so I can keep track of the issue
  528. # [16:52] <anne> actually, I think I know the answer
  529. # [16:52] <anne> oh no
  530. # [16:53] <anne> XBL is not dual-licensed, but has a separate version with a different license
  531. # [16:53] <Bert> If I understand correctly, you want a document that everybody can make derivative works of. In other words, a document that is udner the W3C software license instead of the document license. Seems perfectly doable to me.
  532. # [16:53] <DanC> the right answer is probably a change to some W3C policies. this might take a while, but I think it's probably worthwhile
  533. # [16:54] <Bert> (Pubrules will complain, but pubrules is just a piece of software.)
  534. # [16:54] <Lachy> Bert, yes. It's the authoring guide and it would be useful if software, like validators and authoring tools, could include the information directly in their products
  535. # [16:54] <DanC> yes, that's pretty much what we want, bert
  536. # [16:54] <DanC> and pubrules is not just a piece of software; it's a bunch of policies
  537. # [16:55] <Bert> Sure, what I mean is, don't let pubrules stop you from trying to get it accepted.
  538. # [16:55] <DanC> right
  539. # [16:55] * Quits: matt (matt@128.30.52.30) (Quit: matt)
  540. # [16:56] * Joins: matt (matt@128.30.52.30)
  541. # [17:01] <anne> done: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/spec-prod/2007OctDec/0006.html
  542. # [17:04] <DanC> yup; I forwarded it internally.
  543. # [17:05] * DanC re-assigned ACTION-29 to me, since anne can't really do the next step
  544. # [17:07] <Lachy> anne, I wanted to avoid having my opera address on a public mailing list. Now I'm going to start getting spam :-(
  545. # [17:08] <Philip> Lachy: That's easy to fix - just change your name and get assigned a new email address
  546. # [17:10] <anne> Lachy, that should help in testing the Opera spam filter
  547. # [17:10] * DanC grumbles that tracker doesn't make a link from http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/12 to the minutes to give context
  548. # [17:10] * DanC finds http://www.w3.org/2007/11/10-html-wg-minutes.html#action12 ...
  549. # [17:11] <Lachy> isn't the telcon supposed to have started?
  550. # [17:11] <Lachy> where's Chris?
  551. # [17:11] <DanC> again: telcon starts at 1700Z
  552. # [17:11] <anne> he messed up the time in the e-mail I think
  553. # [17:12] <DanC> see topic and chris's agenda msg and our zakim res
  554. # [17:12] <DanC> phpht. chris fat-fingered it?
  555. # [17:12] <anne> yes, it said 1600Z iirc
  556. # [17:12] <anne> 16:00-00:00 UTC even :)
  557. # [17:13] <Lachy> oh, right. I believed the email
  558. # [17:13] <DanC> I wonder if 9am Pacific is 1700Z
  559. # [17:13] <anne> no, 9 seems to be 1600
  560. # [17:14] <anne> well, for PDT anyway
  561. # [17:14] <DanC> Seattle Thu 9:00 AM
  562. # [17:14] <DanC> Time is fixed on Thursday, November 29, 2007 at 17:00:00 UTC time
  563. # [17:14] <smedero> Did you authorize ChrisWilson to use your time machine, DanC?
  564. # [17:14] <DanC> -- http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=11&day=29&year=2007&hour=17&min=00&sec=0&p1=0
  565. # [17:14] <DanC> <- http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#D20071129
  566. # [17:14] <DanC> <- http://www.w3.org/1998/12/bridge/Zakim.html <- http://www.w3.org/html/wg/il16
  567. # [17:15] <anne> yeah, makes sense
  568. # [17:15] <anne> they're in PST now
  569. # [17:15] <anne> which has an 8 hour offset
  570. # [17:20] * Joins: gsnedders (gsnedders@86.145.188.131)
  571. # [17:24] * Quits: myakura (myakura@222.148.7.61) (Quit: Leaving...)
  572. # [17:31] <DanC> oh... MikeSmith, the surveys link on http://www.w3.org/html/wg/ is a little goofy; try to keep the TOC for this page separate from nearby stuff
  573. # [17:31] <DanC> maybe I'll fix it
  574. # [17:33] * TedNelson5 is now known as MikeSmith
  575. # [17:33] <MikeSmith> DanC - if you have time to fix it they way you want please do
  576. # [17:33] <MikeSmith> one thing I don't like that side bar
  577. # [17:34] <MikeSmith> way too much text there
  578. # [17:34] <anne> ooh, i18n comments on XHR
  579. # [17:34] <MikeSmith> sidebar should just be for navigation, if there is a sidebar
  580. # [17:34] <MikeSmith> anne - i18n comments from whom>
  581. # [17:36] <anne> from the i18n group, of course :)
  582. # [17:36] <Philip> I don't particularly like how the 'Membership and Participation' section has lots of inline links scattered through the paragraphs - it makes it really hard to find e.g. the link to the member list, since I have to read lots of irrelevant text before finding it
  583. # [17:37] <anne> it seems like they're all from Addison Phillips
  584. # [17:37] <Julian> many of these comments seem to confuse the XHR spec with the HTTP spec...
  585. # [17:37] * anne always search "participants"
  586. # [17:38] <anne> yeah
  587. # [17:38] <DanC> I think the inline links are good for the 1st time reader, but I agree they should be repeated in more handy nav structures
  588. # [17:38] <anne> although I wonder why we said that browsers should supply the Accept-Language header
  589. # [17:38] <anne> I'm not sure that makes sense
  590. # [17:38] * Joins: oedipus (oedipus@70.21.181.108)
  591. # [17:38] * Joins: brianlandau (brianlanda@24.106.184.150)
  592. # [17:38] <DanC> I *hate* pages that say "click the link in the upper right corner for our specials"
  593. # [17:39] <DanC> when they could just say: See _our specials_.
  594. # [17:39] <anne> maybe we can have a bookmarks page that lists all the things you want from the HTML WG
  595. # [17:39] <anne> mailing lists, participant list, surveys, agenda
  596. # [17:41] * Quits: hober (ted@68.107.112.172) (Ping timeout)
  597. # [17:41] <MikeSmith> I welcome anybody volunteering a redesign slash content improvements of that page
  598. # [17:42] <MikeSmith> I think the <blink> and <reversevideo> tages are good for drawing attention stuff
  599. # [17:42] <MikeSmith> and the <red> tag
  600. # [17:42] * Philip guesses it would a bad idea to write the page in HTML5
  601. # [17:42] <Philip> +be
  602. # [17:42] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
  603. # [17:42] <oedipus> worse still, DanC, are those who say "click on the specials button at the top of the page" when they mean the graphically defined hyperlink
  604. # [17:45] <oedipus> Mike(tm)Smith, what page are you referring to -- an internal wg resource? has anyone checked it for WCAG compliance (that would be a start)...
  605. # [17:45] <MikeSmith> oedipus, http://www.w3.org/html/wg/
  606. # [17:46] <MikeSmith> I encourage those who know how to check for WCAG conformance to check such conformance of that page
  607. # [17:47] <MikeSmith> Is there a WCAG conformance checker?
  608. # [17:47] <oedipus> ok, i will and will ask that the drafters of WCAG2 take a pass at it -- that's why that working group exists -- to do inreach as well as outreach
  609. # [17:48] <MikeSmith> hmm, inreach
  610. # [17:48] <MikeSmith> not sure I like the sound of that
  611. # [17:48] <MikeSmith> sounds too close for comfort, that
  612. # [17:48] <oedipus> Mike(tm)Smith - not all WCAG checks can be automated -- for those that can and the wg developing them, check http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER
  613. # [17:48] <MikeSmith> oedipus - OK
  614. # [17:49] <oedipus> Shadi Abou-Zahra is still listed as chair and team contact: <shadi@w3.org>
  615. # [17:49] <MikeSmith> hey, his name sounds familiar
  616. # [17:49] <oedipus> i'm trying to find the ERT list of evaluation and repair tools -- and, there is also EARL
  617. # [17:50] <oedipus> http://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10-Schema/ or http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/EARL10-Schema/
  618. # [17:50] <oedipus> DanC has had positive experiences with EARL, i believe
  619. # [17:50] <DanC> :)
  620. # [17:50] <MikeSmith> I've seen presentations from Shadi on EARL
  621. # [17:51] <DanC> most recently, I'm interested in mixing EARL with hReview, as discussed in the "story telling and test cases" session. http://www.w3.org/2007/11/09-html-wg-minutes.html#item01
  622. # [17:51] <oedipus> most likely, you have -- the list of ER tools is at: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tools/ (haven't checked the "last modified" date)
  623. # [17:51] * DanC wonders if my earlsum.py is in that list of tools...
  624. # [17:52] <oedipus> DanC, i'll check (http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tools/advanced - search interface for tools)
  625. # [17:52] <DanC> no match for "earlsum" on http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tools/complete
  626. # [17:52] * Joins: hober (ted@68.107.112.172)
  627. # [17:52] <DanC> nor "connolly"
  628. # [17:53] <DanC> I have sent mail to ERT mailing lists about it
  629. # [17:53] <oedipus> do you have a pointer to it? i'll bug the hell out of them (i'm told i'm good at that sort of thing...)
  630. # [17:53] <MikeSmith> combination of the terms "inreach" and "schema" could be powerful means for extracting confessions during interrogation: If you don't tell us what we want to know, we will publish a normative inreach schema.
  631. # [17:53] <DanC> phpht... the page mentions mailto:public-wai-ert-tools@w3.org but doesn't link the archive
  632. # [17:54] <oedipus> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-er-tools yields a 404
  633. # [17:54] <oedipus> oops forgot a t
  634. # [17:54] <oedipus> DanC, the archive is located at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tools/
  635. # [17:55] <DanC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Feb/0009.html
  636. # [17:55] <oedipus> DanC, i'll follow up -- i'm trying to get all such loose ends tied together so that WAI can work more efficiently with other activities and WGs
  637. # [17:56] <DanC> my tool is pretty geeky; not consumer technology
  638. # [17:56] <oedipus> right now, the geeky tools are the most efficient (in my opinion, but then it's all geek to me)
  639. # [17:56] * Joins: ChrisWilson (cwilso@131.107.0.105)
  640. # [17:56] <MikeSmith> trackbot-ng, start meeting
  641. # [17:56] * trackbot-ng is loading HTML Issue Tracking data...
  642. # [17:56] * trackbot-ng found 15 users
  643. # [17:56] <trackbot-ng> Tracking ISSUEs and ACTIONs from http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/
  644. # [17:56] * trackbot-ng is starting a teleconference
  645. # [17:56] * Joins: RRSAgent (rrs-loggee@128.30.52.30)
  646. # [17:56] <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/11/29-html-wg-irc
  647. # [17:57] <trackbot-ng> RRSAgent, make logs public
  648. # [17:57] <RRSAgent> I have made the request, trackbot-ng
  649. # [17:57] * Joins: Zakim (rrs-bridgg@128.30.52.30)
  650. # [17:57] <trackbot-ng> Zakim, this will be HTML
  651. # [17:57] <Zakim> ok, trackbot-ng, I see HTML_WG()12:00PM already started
  652. # [17:57] <trackbot-ng> Meeting: HTML Issue Tracking Teleconference
  653. # [17:57] <trackbot-ng> Date: 29 November 2007
  654. # [17:57] <DanC> Meeting: HTML WG Weekly
  655. # [17:59] * oedipus says to DanC, the content of the ERT tools interface was last modified 17 march 2006 -- will follow up
  656. # [17:59] <DanC> that interface is pretty intimdating. it should list at least a handful of tools on the cover page
  657. # [17:59] <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
  658. # [18:00] <Zakim> -??P2
  659. # [18:00] <Zakim> +??P2
  660. # [18:00] <ChrisWilson> Zakim, Microsoft is me
  661. # [18:00] <Zakim> +ChrisWilson; got it
  662. # [18:00] <oedipus> it used to be a lot more user-friendly -- methinks i detect an unmaintained, unowned resource...
  663. # [18:00] <Lachy> Zakim, pointer?
  664. # [18:00] <Zakim> I don't understand your question, Lachy.
  665. # [18:00] <Lachy> Zakim, passcode?
  666. # [18:00] <Zakim> the conference code is 4865 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Lachy
  667. # [18:01] <Zakim> + +49.251.280.aaaa
  668. # [18:01] <DanC> darn; didn't get around to hacking on magic namespaces. :-/
  669. # [18:01] <ChrisWilson> Zakim, agenda?
  670. # [18:01] <Zakim> I see nothing on the agenda
  671. # [18:01] <DanC> let alone prep for TAG discussion of namespaceDocument-8 that immediately follows this telcon
  672. # [18:01] <Zakim> +Gregory_Rosmiata
  673. # [18:01] * MikeSmith doesn't know what voodoo code Zakim has assigned him
  674. # [18:01] <ChrisWilson> Zakim, who is on the phone?
  675. # [18:01] <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P2, ChrisWilson, +49.251.280.aaaa, Gregory_Rosmiata
  676. # [18:02] <DanC> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0405.html
  677. # [18:02] <Zakim> +[LC]
  678. # [18:02] <DanC> (that's the archival agenda; http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/agenda is probably more useful during the meeting; see /topic)
  679. # [18:02] <ChrisWilson> Zakim, 49.251.280.aaaa is Julian
  680. # [18:02] <Zakim> sorry, ChrisWilson, I do not recognize a party named '49.251.280.aaaa'
  681. # [18:02] <Zakim> + +047236aabb
  682. # [18:02] <DanC> Zakim, aaaa is Julian
  683. # [18:02] <Zakim> +Julian; got it
  684. # [18:02] * DanC Zakim, call DanC-BOS
  685. # [18:02] * Zakim ok, DanC; the call is being made
  686. # [18:02] <Zakim> +DanC
  687. # [18:02] <Lachy> Zakim, I am aabb
  688. # [18:02] <Zakim> +Lachy; got it
  689. # [18:03] <MikeSmith> Zakim, ??P2 is MikeSmith
  690. # [18:03] <Zakim> +MikeSmith; got it
  691. # [18:03] <Zakim> -Lachy
  692. # [18:03] <ChrisWilson> Still looking for a volunteer to scribe?
  693. # [18:03] <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe
  694. # [18:03] <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Julian
  695. # [18:03] <ChrisWilson> I'm chairing
  696. # [18:03] <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe
  697. # [18:03] <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose MikeSmith
  698. # [18:03] <MikeSmith> heh
  699. # [18:03] <DanC> Chair: ChrisWilson
  700. # [18:03] <MikeSmith> figures
  701. # [18:04] <MikeSmith> Zakim hates me
  702. # [18:04] <MikeSmith> Scribenick: MikeSmith
  703. # [18:04] <MikeSmith> Scribe: MikeSmith
  704. # [18:04] <Zakim> +Lachy
  705. # [18:04] <oedipus> zakim, Gregory_Rosmiata is Gregory_Rosmaita
  706. # [18:04] <Zakim> +Gregory_Rosmaita; got it
  707. # [18:04] <MikeSmith> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
  708. # [18:04] <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/29-html-wg-minutes.html MikeSmith
  709. # [18:04] <ChrisWilson> Zakim, who is on the phone?
  710. # [18:04] <Zakim> On the phone I see MikeSmith, ChrisWilson, Julian, Gregory_Rosmaita, [LC], DanC, +047236aacc
  711. # [18:04] <oedipus> zakim, mute me
  712. # [18:04] <Zakim> sorry, oedipus, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
  713. # [18:04] <oedipus> zakim, mute oedipus
  714. # [18:04] <Zakim> sorry, oedipus, I do not know which phone connection belongs to oedipus
  715. # [18:04] <oedipus> zakim, mute Gregory_Rosmaita
  716. # [18:04] <Zakim> Gregory_Rosmaita should now be muted
  717. # [18:05] * Lachy will have difficulty typing and holding the phone, since he can't use his broken headset :-(
  718. # [18:05] <MikeSmith> Topic: Open Action Items
  719. # [18:05] * MikeSmith thinks Michael C is not on
  720. # [18:06] <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/agenda
  721. # [18:07] <oedipus> GJR: notes that PF has invited simon pieters to join to expedite the process
  722. # [18:07] <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/8
  723. # [18:07] * Joins: Lachy_ (Lachy@213.236.208.22)
  724. # [18:07] <MikeSmith> "Discuss with PFWG role attribute vs aria attribute", on Michael Cooper
  725. # [18:07] <DanC> I updated actions/8
  726. # [18:08] <MikeSmith> keeping Action 8 open pending more talk with Michael Cooper
  727. # [18:08] <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/13
  728. # [18:08] <MikeSmith> "Talk to WebAPI and WAF WGs about their role in offline API stuff and how they work with and contribute to the discussion", on chaals
  729. # [18:09] <oedipus> last PF WG meeting (MC's action discussed) - member confidential archive: http://www.w3.org/2007/11/26-pf-minutes.html
  730. # [18:09] <MikeSmith> ChrisW will bring up with HCG
  731. # [18:09] <DanC> updated actions/13 reassigned to ChrisW, due 13 Dec
  732. # [18:09] <MikeSmith> s/bring up/bring up Action 13/
  733. # [18:09] <MikeSmith> ChrisWilson : what prompted this action?
  734. # [18:10] <MikeSmith> DanC: yeah, Saturday f2f discussion about offline Web apps
  735. # [18:10] <oedipus> zakim, unmute Gregory_Rosmaita
  736. # [18:10] <Zakim> Gregory_Rosmaita should no longer be muted
  737. # [18:10] <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/23
  738. # [18:10] <MikeSmith> "coordinate comparative tests using competing ARIA proposals"
  739. # [18:10] <MikeSmith> oedipus - ran into problem with chair of PF group ...
  740. # [18:10] <MikeSmith> ... they think it's an "undue burden"
  741. # [18:11] * DanC hears an argument to withdraw the action... or maybe continue it...
  742. # [18:11] <MikeSmith> ... there's a push to get it resolved ...
  743. # [18:11] <MikeSmith> ... tomorrow morning there is a meeting with zcorpan (Simon Pieters) to discuss adoption of his ARIA proposal ...
  744. # [18:11] <DanC> (meeting tomorrow? a pointer to mail from whoever is running that meeting would be handy)
  745. # [18:12] <DanC> (er... are we talking about aria-role in substance here or just updating the action status?)
  746. # [18:12] <MikeSmith> oedipus : OK to [declare] a role without declaring a namespace (they agreed to this compromise)
  747. # [18:12] <DanC> agenda + ISSUE-14 aria-role
  748. # [18:12] * Zakim notes agendum 1 added
  749. # [18:12] <MikeSmith> oedipus : have been working with XHTML2 people ...
  750. # [18:13] <zcorpan> DanC, http://www.w3.org/mid/p06110409c3749ffc266b@%5B192.168.1.102%5D
  751. # [18:13] <MikeSmith> ... now need to broker with developers ...
  752. # [18:13] <MikeSmith> oedipus : I can report back about this [after the meeting tomorrow]
  753. # [18:13] <DanC> (which we agreed?)
  754. # [18:13] <MikeSmith> ChrisWilson : DanC you noted that you wanted examples
  755. # [18:13] <MikeSmith> DanC : yep
  756. # [18:13] <DanC> (I got the pointers I needed.)
  757. # [18:14] * DanC Zakim, who's on the phone?
  758. # [18:14] * Zakim sees on the phone: MikeSmith, ChrisWilson, Julian, Gregory_Rosmaita, [LC], DanC, +047236aacc
  759. # [18:14] <DanC> (3 meetings GR just mentioned... pointers please)
  760. # [18:14] <MikeSmith> Zakim, aacc is Lachy
  761. # [18:14] <Zakim> +Lachy; got it
  762. # [18:15] <oedipus> friday 30 november 2007 - meeting with simon pieters http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-pf/2007OctDec/0257.html
  763. # [18:15] * MikeSmith or maybe it's not Lachy
  764. # [18:15] * Lachy Zakim already recognised me after I redialed, I don't think that's me
  765. # [18:15] <MikeSmith> Zakim, aacc is not Lachy
  766. # [18:15] <Zakim> I don't understand 'aacc is not Lachy', MikeSmith
  767. # [18:15] <DanC> I marked ACTION-23 witdrawn
  768. # [18:16] <MikeSmith> ACTION: Gregory to report back after 11-30 meeting on ARIA syntax
  769. # [18:16] * trackbot-ng noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
  770. # [18:16] * RRSAgent records action 1
  771. # [18:16] <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-30 - Report back after 11-30 meeting on ARIA syntax [on Gregory Rosmaita - due 2007-12-06].
  772. # [18:16] <MikeSmith> DanC : W3C process requires 7-day notice for meetings
  773. # [18:17] * Quits: zcorpan (zcorpan@88.131.66.80) (Connection reset by peer)
  774. # [18:17] <MikeSmith> oedipus : this is an attempt to work with the vendors who are supportive of ARIA
  775. # [18:17] * anne thinks it's Lachy unless there's someone else calling in from NO
  776. # [18:17] * Joins: zcorpan (zcorpan@88.131.66.80)
  777. # [18:18] <DanC> q+ to note regrets for next week 6 Dec
  778. # [18:18] * Zakim sees DanC on the speaker queue
  779. # [18:18] <Lachy> Zakim, mute me
  780. # [18:18] <Zakim> Lachy should now be muted
  781. # [18:18] <MikeSmith> [discussion of getting "PF ducks in a row" and "mutual reality check"
  782. # [18:18] <oedipus> zakim, mute Gregory_Rosmaita
  783. # [18:18] <Zakim> Gregory_Rosmaita should now be muted
  784. # [18:18] <DanC> ack danc
  785. # [18:18] <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note regrets for next week 6 Dec
  786. # [18:18] * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
  787. # [18:19] <MikeSmith> DanC notes he won't be here next week; ChrisWilson will chair again
  788. # [18:19] <DanC> next meeting: 6 Dec, Chris W to chair
  789. # [18:19] <MikeSmith> [moving on to discussion of Pending Review AIs]
  790. # [18:19] <MikeSmith> Topic: Issue 7, Video Codecs
  791. # [18:20] <MikeSmith> s/Issue 7/Issue 4/
  792. # [18:20] <DanC> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0153.html [homework] summary of the video (and audio) codec discussion
  793. # [18:20] <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/agenda
  794. # [18:20] <MikeSmith> ChrisWilson : this seems complete[d]
  795. # [18:20] <MikeSmith> DanC will be at the Video Workshop
  796. # [18:21] <MikeSmith> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0153.html
  797. # [18:21] <MikeSmith> above is posting from Dave Singer
  798. # [18:21] <DanC> ACTION: Dan see that Singer's summary makes it to the SJC/Dec W3C video workshop, possibly by confirming Singer's attendance
  799. # [18:21] * trackbot-ng noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
  800. # [18:21] * RRSAgent records action 2
  801. # [18:21] <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-31 - See that Singer's summary makes it to the SJC/Dec W3C video workshop, possibly by confirming Singer's attendance [on Dan Connolly - due 2007-12-06].
  802. # [18:22] * oedipus notes that dave singer has very fruitful morining with the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines WG at TPAC
  803. # [18:22] <MikeSmith> Topic: ACTION 5, task force for developer community outreach (on Karl)
  804. # [18:22] * DanC encourages MikeSmith to q+ re karl's authoring proposal
  805. # [18:22] <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/5
  806. # [18:23] <MikeSmith> q+ to comment on Karl's proposal
  807. # [18:23] * Zakim sees MikeSmith on the speaker queue
  808. # [18:23] <Lachy> Zakim, unmute me
  809. # [18:23] <Zakim> Lachy should no longer be muted
  810. # [18:23] <smedero> fyi: Dave Singer's email was tacked on to the issue for video-codecs: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/7
  811. # [18:24] <DanC> ack MikeSmith
  812. # [18:24] <Zakim> MikeSmith, you wanted to comment on Karl's proposal
  813. # [18:24] * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
  814. # [18:24] <DanC> ok by me, action done... now what next... a note and a wiki topic look OK to me
  815. # [18:25] <DanC> q+ to note another idea: an edited series of blog articles
  816. # [18:25] * Zakim sees DanC on the speaker queue
  817. # [18:25] <MikeSmith> Lachy - I'm trying to incorporate Karl's proposal into my draft ...
  818. # [18:26] <MikeSmith> ... as well as stuff from Roger
  819. # [18:26] <DanC> ok: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/products/5 Product HTML 5 authoring guidelines
  820. # [18:27] <DanC> yeah, not a good name. Mike to fix
  821. # [18:28] <DanC> (did lachy take an action)
  822. # [18:28] <MikeSmith> ACTION: MikeSmith to change the product name of "HTML 5 authoring guidelines" in the tracker to sometthing else, eventually
  823. # [18:28] * trackbot-ng noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
  824. # [18:28] <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - MikeSmith
  825. # [18:28] * RRSAgent records action 3
  826. # [18:28] <MikeSmith> ACTION: Michael(tm) to change the product name of "HTML 5 authoring guidelines" in the tracker to sometthing else, eventually
  827. # [18:28] * trackbot-ng noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
  828. # [18:28] * RRSAgent records action 4
  829. # [18:28] <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-32 - Change the product name of \"HTML 5 authoring guidelines\" in the tracker to sometthing else, eventually [on Michael(tm) Smith - due 2007-12-06].
  830. # [18:28] <Lachy> DanC, what action would you like me to take?
  831. # [18:29] <MikeSmith> Topic: canvas survey questions
  832. # [18:29] <DanC> good question. maybe none, for now
  833. # [18:29] <Lachy> ok
  834. # [18:29] <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/req-gapi-canvas/
  835. # [18:29] * Lachy is happy to have an action to do nothing
  836. # [18:30] <DanC> trackbot-ng, status
  837. # [18:30] * trackbot-ng knows about the following 15 users: Michael(tm), Anne, Chris, Karl, Shawn, Dan, Michael, David, Charles, Maciej, James, Gregory, David, Ian, Julian
  838. # [18:30] <DanC> . ACTION: Lachy prepare web developer guide for publication as a Note
  839. # [18:31] <DanC> yup, regular web pages or blogs are fine by me
  840. # [18:31] <MikeSmith> Justin: [suggestion about considering blog items]
  841. # [18:34] <MikeSmith> DanC - I consider the series-of-blog items to be a fairly definitive way of publishing this kind of information.
  842. # [18:35] <DanC> s/definitive/comfortable/
  843. # [18:35] * Joins: jgraham_ (james@81.86.218.70)
  844. # [18:36] <DanC> ACTION: Lachy prepare web developer guide for publication as a Note
  845. # [18:36] * trackbot-ng noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
  846. # [18:36] <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - Lachy
  847. # [18:36] * RRSAgent records action 5
  848. # [18:36] <DanC> ACTION: Lachy prepare web developer guide, maybe as a Note, maybe other
  849. # [18:36] * trackbot-ng noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
  850. # [18:36] * RRSAgent records action 6
  851. # [18:36] <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - Lachy
  852. # [18:36] <DanC> (
  853. # [18:36] <DanC> (Lachy, can I add you to the issue tracking task force? i.e. will you be in touch with the chairs regularly?)
  854. # [18:37] <MikeSmith> Lachy : we want to be able to update the info after we publish it
  855. # [18:37] <anne> That's possible with a Note
  856. # [18:38] <ChrisWilson> (i.e. the content will change as the HTML5 spec changes)
  857. # [18:38] <DanC> (I presume so...)
  858. # [18:38] <anne> You just publish another one Note
  859. # [18:38] <ChrisWilson> sure
  860. # [18:38] <anne> s/one //
  861. # [18:38] <MikeSmith> ... blogs are good for describing current state of things but not for things that need to be updated
  862. # [18:38] <DanC> trackbot-ng, status
  863. # [18:38] * trackbot-ng knows about the following 15 users: Michael(tm), Anne, Chris, Karl, Shawn, Dan, Michael, David, Charles, Maciej, James, Gregory, David, Ian, Julian
  864. # [18:39] <DanC> ACTION: ChrisWilson to investigate an HTML WG blog, a la the way the I18N WG does it
  865. # [18:39] * trackbot-ng noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
  866. # [18:39] * RRSAgent records action 7
  867. # [18:39] <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-33 - Investigate an HTML WG blog, a la the way the I18N WG does it [on Chris Wilson - due 2007-12-06].
  868. # [18:39] <DanC> due jan
  869. # [18:41] <DanC> Zakim, who's making noise?
  870. # [18:41] <Zakim> DanC, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: MikeSmith (9%), ChrisWilson (9%), Lachy (13%), DanC (13%)
  871. # [18:41] <MikeSmith> trackbot-ng, status
  872. # [18:41] * trackbot-ng knows about the following 15 users: Michael(tm), Anne, Chris, Karl, Shawn, Dan, Michael, David, Charles, Maciej, James, Gregory, David, Ian, Julian
  873. # [18:41] <MikeSmith> trackbot-ng, reboot
  874. # [18:41] <Lachy> Zakim, mute me
  875. # [18:41] <Zakim> Lachy should now be muted
  876. # [18:41] <MikeSmith> trackbot-ng, reload
  877. # [18:41] <trackbot-ng> Reloading Tracker config
  878. # [18:41] * trackbot-ng is loading HTML Issue Tracking data...
  879. # [18:41] * trackbot-ng found 16 users
  880. # [18:41] <trackbot-ng> Tracking ISSUEs and ACTIONs from http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/
  881. # [18:41] <MikeSmith> trackbot-ng, status
  882. # [18:41] * trackbot-ng knows about the following 16 users: Michael(tm), Anne, Chris, Karl, Lachlan, Shawn, Dan, Michael, David, Charles, Maciej, James, Gregory, David, Ian, Julian
  883. # [18:41] <ChrisWilson> Any interest in discussing any of the other open issues that have seen recent discussion?
  884. # [18:42] <ChrisWilson> (or haven't seen recent discussion?)
  885. # [18:42] <MikeSmith> DanC - yu can assign that issue to Lachlan now
  886. # [18:42] <oedipus> GJR: would like a continuation on http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/24 - i've noted in the tracker the steps taken so far, and am in the process of finalizing a tweaked stylesheet for review
  887. # [18:42] <MikeSmith> s/Any interest/Topic: Other current issues being discussion on public-html/
  888. # [18:43] <MikeSmith> [discussion of nonconformance of the style attribute in HTML]
  889. # [18:43] <MikeSmith> s/HTML]/HTML5]/
  890. # [18:44] <MikeSmith> ChrisWilson : how are we tracking follow-up and resolution on these issues?
  891. # [18:44] <MikeSmith> DanC : there is a new testing task force?
  892. # [18:44] <ChrisWilson> s /tracking/ensuring
  893. # [18:44] <MikeSmith> q+ to talk about testsuite stuff
  894. # [18:44] * Zakim sees DanC, MikeSmith on the speaker queue
  895. # [18:44] <Lachy> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-testsuite/
  896. # [18:45] <Lachy> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-testsuite/2007Nov/0001.html
  897. # [18:45] <ChrisWilson> q?
  898. # [18:45] * Zakim sees DanC, MikeSmith on the speaker queue
  899. # [18:45] <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/26
  900. # [18:46] <DanC> ack danc
  901. # [18:46] <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note another idea: an edited series of blog articles
  902. # [18:46] * Zakim sees MikeSmith on the speaker queue
  903. # [18:46] <MikeSmith> above is about testsuite stuff
  904. # [18:46] <DanC> ack MikeSmith
  905. # [18:46] <Zakim> MikeSmith, you wanted to talk about testsuite stuff
  906. # [18:46] * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
  907. # [18:46] <MikeSmith> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-wg-issue-tracking/2007Nov/0006.html
  908. # [18:46] <DanC> ah... test suite product is already there... http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/products/4
  909. # [18:47] * Lachy wonders what the new public-html-wg-issue-tracking list is for? Shoud I subscribe to that?
  910. # [18:48] <ChrisWilson> Tracker watching public-html; the public-issue-tracking is for discussing how we do issue tracking.
  911. # [18:49] <ChrisWilson> Above was DanC
  912. # [18:49] <smedero> Lachy: it was primarily for discussion of issues with the Tracker software... and yes... what ChrisWilson said.
  913. # [18:49] <Lachy> ok, so it's not something I need to subscribe to (I'm on too many lists already :-))
  914. # [18:49] <ChrisWilson> I believe that is true, yes.
  915. # [18:49] <ChrisWilson> I don't think I'm subscribed.
  916. # [18:50] <smedero> We just didn't want to clutter public-html with noise on backoffice issues
  917. # [18:50] <Julian> No, I didn't.
  918. # [18:51] <MikeSmith> [discussion about mailing lists and interaction with tracker:
  919. # [18:51] <ChrisWilson> Any other issues?
  920. # [18:51] <ChrisWilson> Motion to adjourn?
  921. # [18:51] <Lachy> bye
  922. # [18:51] <Julian> c u
  923. # [18:51] <Zakim> -Julian
  924. # [18:51] <ChrisWilson> bye
  925. # [18:51] <Zakim> -Lachy
  926. # [18:51] <Zakim> -[LC]
  927. # [18:51] <Zakim> -Gregory_Rosmaita
  928. # [18:51] * Quits: Julian (chatzilla@217.91.35.233) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.79 [Firefox 2.0.0.10/2007111504])
  929. # [18:51] <MikeSmith> [no objections to adjourning heard]
  930. # [18:52] <ChrisWilson> ADJOURN
  931. # [18:52] <MikeSmith> cheers for meetings that don't go a full hour
  932. # [18:52] <MikeSmith> Thanks ChrisWilson
  933. # [18:52] <ChrisWilson> (DanC seconded)
  934. # [18:52] <ChrisWilson> heh. Apparently I should chair more often. Don't tell Dan.
  935. # [18:52] <Zakim> -MikeSmith
  936. # [18:52] <DanC> tracker's agenda-building support is really working well
  937. # [18:53] <MikeSmith> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
  938. # [18:53] <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/29-html-wg-minutes.html MikeSmith
  939. # [18:53] <Zakim> -ChrisWilson
  940. # [18:53] <MikeSmith> DanC - yeah, thanks to systeam and to Dom in particular probably for the new features
  941. # [18:54] * MikeSmith wanders off for a bit; will publish minutes later
  942. # [18:54] * MikeSmith is now known as Crackbot
  943. # [18:54] <DanC> you are charing more often, ChrisWilson . for which, thanks.
  944. # [18:55] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  945. # [18:56] <DanC> RRSAgent, pointer?
  946. # [18:56] <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2007/11/29-html-wg-irc#T17-55-13
  947. # [19:36] <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, DanC, in HTML_WG()12:00PM
  948. # [19:36] <Zakim> HTML_WG()12:00PM has ended
  949. # [19:36] <Zakim> Attendees were ChrisWilson, +49.251.280.aaaa, [LC], +047236aabb, Julian, DanC, Lachy, MikeSmith, Gregory_Rosmaita
  950. # [19:37] * Joins: aroben (aroben@17.203.12.72)
  951. # [19:46] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@84.215.41.149)
  952. # [20:00] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@84.215.41.149) (Connection reset by peer)
  953. # [20:12] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@88.91.106.25)
  954. # [20:15] * Quits: matt (matt@128.30.52.30) (Quit: matt)
  955. # [20:19] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@88.91.106.25) (Ping timeout)
  956. # [20:24] * Quits: zcorpan (zcorpan@88.131.66.80) (Ping timeout)
  957. # [20:26] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@84.215.41.149)
  958. # [20:35] * Joins: Julian (chatzilla@80.143.164.19)
  959. # [20:50] * Quits: ROBOd (robod@89.122.216.38) (Quit: http://www.robodesign.ro )
  960. # [20:57] <Hixie> DanC: ping (can i help with ACTION-28?)
  961. # [21:01] * DanC changes topic to 'HTML WG meets Thu 29 Nov at 17:00UTC http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/agenda (logs: hihttp://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ ) '
  962. # [21:01] <DanC> hi
  963. # [21:01] <DanC> (my irc client just did something surprising. oh well.)
  964. # [21:02] * Quits: oedipus (oedipus@70.21.181.108) (Quit: Freedom Chat - Your Home Away From Home | http://www.freedomchat.org | tIRC script by the Freedom Chat Leets)
  965. # [21:02] <DanC> I started the internal discussion; one question that came back was: can we do a feature freeze while we're at it? I said: quite possibly, based on http://blog.whatwg.org/html5-snapshot
  966. # [21:03] <DanC> do you want to hear about some of the possible dates after December 2007? speaking them into existence makes them more likely to happen
  967. # [21:03] <Hixie> yeah, other than the rendering section, ruby, and the forms stuff, i'm not aware of anything that isn't in the pending feedback that really needs to be in 5.0
  968. # [21:03] <Hixie> (maybe the namespace / math / svg stuff that has been proposed by sam and others)
  969. # [21:04] <Hixie> (but i don't know that we have enough experience with that yet to put it in 5.0)
  970. # [21:04] * DanC wonders if I should add 3 requirements issue on " rendering section, ruby, and the forms stuff" real quick... stands by...
  971. # [21:04] <Hixie> rendering section = the default rendering of the existing features, it's just that they're defined in a separate section since it's all non-normative stuff
  972. # [21:05] <Hixie> ruby = i18n semantics, just need to reverse engineer IE's implementation to add it
  973. # [21:05] <DanC> right; the current draft says "rendering: TBD", IIRC
  974. # [21:05] <Hixie> and the forms stuff is currently wf2, it's just waiting for the forms task force to come back to us with a conclusion
  975. # [21:06] <DanC> I like to have all the stuff we're waiting for in the tracker somewhere
  976. # [21:06] <Hixie> re other dates, i don't mind discussing dates, but what i really want is (as noted in mail 0423) a clear list of requirements and a detailed and binding timetable for publication of the current spec as a FPWD
  977. # [21:06] <DanC> re namespace/math/svg, I'm fairly optimistic, though I have been saying "maybe not html 5; maybe in the next version" but I also say "i.e. in 2 or 3 years"
  978. # [21:07] <Hixie> i don't mind things getting added to the tracker :-)
  979. # [21:07] <Hixie> ruby is hte only one of the three that doesn't have a placeholder in the spec, fwiw
  980. # [21:08] * Quits: smedero (smedero@158.130.16.191) (Quit: smedero)
  981. # [21:09] <DanC> I don't know if I can come up with a clear list of requirements on behalf of the whole WG, but the biggest issue seems to be the charter and canvas. IBM and Microsoft argue that the charter should be changed before canvas is published in an HTML WG WD.
  982. # [21:09] <Hixie> and a much larger number of people argue otherwise... so...
  983. # [21:09] <DanC> I'm encouraged by your support for the idea of splitting out the 2d graphics API.
  984. # [21:10] <DanC> larger than the collection of IBM and Microsoft employees and customers? I haven't seen that.
  985. # [21:10] <Lachy> DanC, I updated the status of the HTML guide per your previous request
  986. # [21:10] <DanC> thanks, Lachy
  987. # [21:10] <Hixie> DanC: wait, we're basing this on customer and employee counts?
  988. # [21:10] <Hixie> (i think google probably has at least the same number of customers as microsoft)
  989. # [21:10] <DanC> yes, I'm basing it on the position of IBM and Microsoft in the overall marketplace.
  990. # [21:10] <Lachy> DanC, where can I find a template for the status section of a Last Call spec? I need it for selectors api
  991. # [21:10] <DanC> and yes, Google is a force to be reckoned with
  992. # [21:11] <DanC> Lachy, something like that should be near http://www.w3.org/2003/Editors/ .
  993. # [21:11] <Hixie> well, this is a new technique for consensus forming, i wasn't aware of it before
  994. # [21:11] <Hixie> but ok
  995. # [21:12] <Lachy> thanks
  996. # [21:12] <DanC> yes, first came ISO with 1-country-one-vote, then came IETF with one-mailbox-one-vote; W3C is something in between.
  997. # [21:12] <Hixie> DanC: i think i would have to insist that we have a clear list of requirements and a detailed and binding timetable for publication of the current spec as a FPWD, especially if we're going to be using new and undocumented ways of determining that 2 > 43
  998. # [21:13] <DanC> W3C process tries to acknowledge the role of our members in the overall deployment landscape
  999. # [21:13] <Hixie> DanC: otherwise it really does feel like, to use mjs' phrase, we are going into an "unbounded slip"
  1000. # [21:13] <Hixie> i certainly haven't seen that be done in the past, or be mentioned in the charter
  1001. # [21:13] <DanC> new and undocumented? this is all laid out in the W3C process document. there's nothing new about it.
  1002. # [21:13] <Hixie> (i feel my company's management would find such a policy anticompetitive, even given our position in the market)
  1003. # [21:14] <Hixie> where?
  1004. # [21:14] <Hixie> s/charter/process document/
  1005. # [21:14] <Hixie> i've read the process document many times and definitely don't remember anything about market positioning
  1006. # [21:14] <Hixie> is this new?
  1007. # [21:14] <DanC> things like "In the case (described in paragraph 5g of the Membership Agreement), where a Member organization is itself a consortium, user society, or otherwise has members or sponsors, the organization's paid staff and Advisory Committee representative exercise all the rights and privileges of W3C membership." -- http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#Organization
  1008. # [21:15] <Hixie> right, that's actually saying that only the direct employees of member companies are w3c members
  1009. # [21:15] <DanC> and http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#MemberRelated 2.1.2 Related Members
  1010. # [21:16] <Hixie> again, that's actually limiting the effect of large companies or groups to avoid exactly what you are proposing
  1011. # [21:16] <DanC> (more clearly: only direct employees of w3c member organizations are granted access to member-confidential materials.)
  1012. # [21:16] <Hixie> right
  1013. # [21:17] <Hixie> i nfact section 3.4 is explicit:
  1014. # [21:17] <gsnedders> "The Team must ensure that Member participation agreements remain Team-only and that no Member receives preferential treatment within W3C."
  1015. # [21:17] <Hixie> "each organization represented in the group MUST have at most one vote"
  1016. # [21:17] <Hixie> and "For the purposes of voting:
  1017. # [21:17] <Hixie> * A Member or group of related Members is considered a single organization."
  1018. # [21:17] <gsnedders> surely that implies that preferring a member like MS over a member with a smaller marketshare like Apple breaks the process?
  1019. # [21:17] <Hixie> certainly seems that way to me
  1020. # [21:17] <DanC> yes, but the number of votes is not terribly relevant
  1021. # [21:17] * Joins: kingryan (kingryan@66.92.2.56)
  1022. # [21:18] <DanC> one vote from a market leader constitutes a strong argument
  1023. # [21:18] <gsnedders> DanC: but that's preferring that member
  1024. # [21:18] <gsnedders> DanC: which goes against what I quoted
  1025. # [21:18] <DanC> it's not preferring; it's acknowledging the role of that member in the deployment of web technology
  1026. # [21:18] <Hixie> DanC: ok, but in that case i think i would have to insist that we have a clear list of requirements and a detailed and binding timetable for publication of the current spec as a FPWD, since otherwise i have no way of determining whether progress is being made, which makes it hard for me to defend my continued participation in the w3c with my management
  1027. # [21:19] <DanC> insisting on it won't magically create it.
  1028. # [21:19] <Hixie> indeed, i was hoping you might create it
  1029. # [21:19] <Hixie> since only you are able to do so
  1030. # [21:19] <gsnedders> DanC: under en-gb-oed "acknowledging the role of that member in the deployment of web technology" is most certainly preferring
  1031. # [21:19] <Hixie> i am willing to help as much as humanly possible
  1032. # [21:20] <DanC> the only listsI can think of set an unrealisitically high bar; e.g. yes votes from 80% of the participating W3C member orgs and no formal objections.
  1033. # [21:20] <DanC> it's not unfairly preferring
  1034. # [21:20] <Hixie> if the requirements are unrealistically high, that would be something i would like to know, rather than just have us fail to meet the goals without knowing what the goals are
  1035. # [21:20] <DanC> the goal is consensus
  1036. # [21:21] <gsnedders> DanC: the quote didn't say whether the preference was fair or unfair, just that there was a preference.
  1037. # [21:21] <Hixie> danc: as in, everyone in the working group agreeing or abstaining or not voting? or something else?
  1038. # [21:21] <DanC> yes, the W3C definition of consensus is "everyone in the working group agreeing or abstaining or not voting", plus lots of actual yes votes
  1039. # [21:22] <DanC> the goal is alwas consensus; sometimes we settle for less
  1040. # [21:22] <DanC> always
  1041. # [21:22] <Hixie> so all it would take to perpetually block the working group's work is for me to juts always vote no? that's certainly an interesting situation given the size of this working group. is that really what you are saying?
  1042. # [21:22] <DanC> no; noone has veto power
  1043. # [21:22] <Hixie> so when do we settle for less? is there some defined way you determine when we should proceed without consensus?
  1044. # [21:23] * Joins: dbaron (dbaron@63.245.220.241)
  1045. # [21:23] <Hixie> truly, i just want to know what we need to do to publish the current spec as a FPWD, and when we can do so
  1046. # [21:23] <DanC> we settle for less at the chair's discretion, per our charter and W3C process.
  1047. # [21:24] <Hixie> ok, but the chair's discretion so far has seemed arbitrary and biased by a minority. as noted above, if this is to continue, i really think we need a clear list of requirements and a detailed and binding timetable for publication of the current spec as a FPWD.
  1048. # [21:24] <DanC> I think Dec 2007 is a good goal, though I give it less than even odds. 6 months is too long. 3 months is what I think we can aim for and hit or beat. Q1 2008.
  1049. # [21:24] <Hixie> can we have that as a binding timetable in writing?
  1050. # [21:24] <DanC> maybe
  1051. # [21:24] <DanC> I haven't finished my internal discussion
  1052. # [21:26] <Hixie> any idea when that might happen? i don't mean to push, but it's been 8 months so far, so if 6 months is too long as you say, we've already delayed too long.
  1053. # [21:26] <mjs> did someone invoke my name in vain?
  1054. # [21:26] <DanC> my internal discussion should finish in 1 to 3 weeks
  1055. # [21:26] <DanC> I think you do mean to push, and I appreciate it. :)
  1056. # [21:26] <gsnedders> mjs: Hixie used your phrase, "unbounded slip"
  1057. # [21:27] <Hixie> DanC: ok, i don't mean to seem to be pushing unreasonably :-)
  1058. # [21:27] <gsnedders> mjs: (and references it as being yours)
  1059. # [21:27] <gsnedders> s/s/d/
  1060. # [21:28] <Hixie> DanC: so in 1 to 3 weeks we can get a detailed and binding timetable for publication of the current spec as a FPWD?
  1061. # [21:28] <DanC> yes, I expect so.
  1062. # [21:28] <Hixie> ok
  1063. # [21:28] <Hixie> what should i do if you won't give a a detailed and binding timetable for publication of the current spec as a FPWD in 3 weeks?
  1064. # [21:28] <mjs> DanC: if you're weighting members by financial considerations, could we use market capitalization?
  1065. # [21:29] <mjs> DanC: then I think google + apple + nokia outweighs microsoft + ibm
  1066. # [21:29] * DanC is conflicted... 2 interesting questions at once...
  1067. # [21:30] <DanC> recall the goup from the charter about x% of web pages as measured by N auditing orgs? I'm inclined to capture it along those lines in a requirements issue, mjs. something about # of web pages produced/consumed/affected/etc.
  1068. # [21:31] <Hixie> well by that measure google probably easily wins, since we publish every page in the google cache...
  1069. # [21:31] <DanC> i.e. something like "if the people who deploy 97% of the web agree, with regret that we couldn't make the rest of you happy, we're moving on"
  1070. # [21:31] <Hixie> (heck, google has its own line on the netcraft survey, it has so many sites)
  1071. # [21:31] <DanC> we'd factor in popularity somehow; i.e. page views
  1072. # [21:31] <mjs> I doubt we could ever get the people who deploy 90% of the web in the working group
  1073. # [21:31] <mjs> long tail and all
  1074. # [21:31] <DanC> ok, salt the numbers to taste
  1075. # [21:32] <Hixie> DanC: if i can possibly be so impolite as to ask again... what should i do if you won't give a a detailed and binding timetable for publication of the current spec as a FPWD in 3 weeks?
  1076. # [21:33] <DanC> if I don't deliver on ACTION-28 in 1 to 3 weeks, Hixie , you should expect a darned good explanation. And If I don't have one, you should feel justified in taking extreme measures.
  1077. # [21:34] <Hixie> ACTION-28 doesn't require you to come up with a binding timetable
  1078. # [21:34] <DanC> if I don't deliver on ACTION-28 in 1 to 3 weeks by coming up with a binding timetable, Hixie , you should expect a darned good explanation. And If I don't have one, you should feel justified in taking extreme measures.
  1079. # [21:34] <Hixie> ok
  1080. # [21:34] <Hixie> thank you
  1081. # [21:34] * Hixie marks his calendar
  1082. # [21:34] <DanC> likewise.
  1083. # [21:35] <mjs> I would also like to see a timetable or a specific checklist or both
  1084. # [21:35] <mjs> my experience in software is that slipping by a predefined amount is tolerable, but day for day slip is doom for the project and torture for everyone working on it
  1085. # [21:35] <DanC> indeed; the someday pile is no place to be
  1086. # [21:36] <DanC> did you see discussion of Dec/6 months/3 months/Q1 2008?
  1087. # [21:36] <DanC> replay: I think Dec 2007 is a good goal, though I give it less than even odds. 6 months is too long. 3 months is what I think we can aim for and hit or beat. Q1 2008.
  1088. # [21:38] <mjs> if we pick any of those dates and stick with it I would probably be satisfied
  1089. # [21:38] <Hixie> i could live with one of those dates as a date to publish the current spec as FPWD, if it is indeed binding
  1090. # [21:38] <Lachy> can someone record this decision in the tracker or on the mailing list or something
  1091. # [21:40] <DanC> you can, if you mail public-html with "ACTION-28" in the subject or body
  1092. # [21:40] <DanC> i.e. anyone can, yes
  1093. # [21:40] <Lachy> ok, will do.
  1094. # [21:41] <Lachy> I'll just copy the relevant parts of the IRC log
  1095. # [21:43] <Julian> for the record: I didn't see any "decision" here. Dan has promised he'll try to come up with a timetable, that's it. Or did I miss something?
  1096. # [21:43] <Lachy> Julian, that's what I was referring to
  1097. # [21:43] <DanC> dan has taken ACTION-28 and expects to complete it by coming up with a binding timetable
  1098. # [21:44] <Julian> ack
  1099. # [21:45] <DanC> by the way, mjs, I was royally pissed off when I read http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0414.html the 1st time. I'm sure glad I deleted my first few draft responses :)
  1100. # [21:45] <DanC> and I'm sure glad I had a dentist appointment so I couldn't sit and stew, and then I went to the gym and stuff.
  1101. # [21:46] <Hixie> you probably felt much like we did after reading the e-mail to which that was a reply :-)
  1102. # [21:46] <DanC> yes, I did provoke it to some extent...
  1103. # [21:46] <DanC> ... though really, I feel like I'm caught in the middle
  1104. # [21:47] <mjs> DanC: I was royally pissed while writing it, perhaps I didn't do a good enough job of toning it down
  1105. # [21:47] <DanC> I'm trying to make both/all sides happy, and I'm getting zinged from all sides. But today I'm back to feeling pretty happy that we're all doing our level best.
  1106. # [21:49] <DanC> which reminds me of some suggestions in mail from mjs that I'd like to think about more carefully...
  1107. # [21:52] <DanC> mjs, re other organizations, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0427.html has a/the list
  1108. # [21:53] * DanC noodles on whether 3 months is enough time to change the chater, if it comes to that... yes... it is.
  1109. # [21:57] <Dashiva> Just because it might be enough doesn't mean it's going to be enough in practice, though...
  1110. # [21:59] * Dashiva was reading through mail backlog and found "While consensus is always a goal, it is not required for publication" by DanC, talking about the HDP.
  1111. # [21:59] <Dashiva> Strange coincidence :)
  1112. # [21:59] <DanC> I have a lot of control over how long it takes. the formal process is a 4 week review by the W3C membership, preceeded by an unbounded amount of staff discussion (that I'm confident I can keep to 3 weeks) followed by time for The Director to consider the membership reviews (which is traditionally 2 weeks and which I think I can keep to 3)
  1113. # [22:16] * Quits: brianlandau (brianlanda@24.106.184.150) (Quit: brianlandau)
  1114. # [22:19] * Quits: heycam (cam@203.217.79.225) (Quit: bye)
  1115. # [22:25] * Quits: mjs (mjs@64.81.48.145) (Quit: mjs)
  1116. # [22:30] * DanC sent mail to process-issues about whether the process document is clear enough about taking market/community position into consideration
  1117. # [22:36] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.227.30.12)
  1118. # [22:37] * Quits: aaronlev (chatzilla@66.30.196.151) (Client exited)
  1119. # [22:38] * Joins: aaronlev (chatzilla@66.30.196.151)
  1120. # [22:55] * Joins: heycam (cam@130.194.72.84)
  1121. # [22:56] * Quits: aaronlev (chatzilla@66.30.196.151) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.79 [Firefox 3.0b2pre/2007112905])
  1122. # [23:09] * Quits: Julian (chatzilla@80.143.164.19) (Ping timeout)
  1123. # [23:10] * Quits: gsnedders (gsnedders@86.145.188.131) (Quit: gsnedders)
  1124. # [23:18] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.96.166)
  1125. # [23:22] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.96.166) (Quit: mjs)
  1126. # [23:31] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.96.166)
  1127. # [23:36] * Quits: inimino (chatzilla@75.71.88.233) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.79 [Firefox 2.0.0.9/2007102501])
  1128. # [23:52] <anne> told the forms tf that the charter review period is over
  1129. # [23:55] <Dashiva> Does that mean you'll start work now?
  1130. # [23:55] <anne> we're accepting input now
  1131. # [23:55] <anne> I don't personally have a proposal
  1132. # Session Close: Fri Nov 30 00:00:00 2007

The end :)