/irc-logs / w3c / #html-wg / 2007-09-05 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Wed Sep 05 00:00:00 2007
  2. # Session Ident: #html-wg
  3. # [00:02] * Joins: hasather (hasather@90.227.221.48)
  4. # [00:13] * Quits: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167) (Ping timeout)
  5. # [00:17] * Parts: billmason (billmason@69.30.57.156)
  6. # [00:21] * Quits: robburns (robburns@98.193.22.194) (Quit: robburns)
  7. # [00:24] * Quits: hasather (hasather@90.227.221.48) (Quit: leaving)
  8. # [00:29] * Joins: robburns (robburns@98.193.22.194)
  9. # [00:49] * Quits: zcorpan_ (zcorpan@85.227.145.211) (Ping timeout)
  10. # [00:52] * Joins: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30)
  11. # [00:55] * Quits: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228) (Client exited)
  12. # [00:56] * Joins: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228)
  13. # [00:56] * Quits: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228) (Quit: Don't touch /dev/null…)
  14. # [00:57] * Joins: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228)
  15. # [01:06] * Quits: robburns (robburns@98.193.22.194) (Quit: robburns)
  16. # [01:08] * Quits: tH (Rob@87.102.118.51) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.78.1-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.8.0.9/2006120508])
  17. # [01:11] * Joins: sbuluf (dkbt@200.49.140.157)
  18. # [01:14] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@17.203.15.195) (Quit: aroben)
  19. # [01:17] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.107.191)
  20. # [01:19] * Quits: mjs_ (mjs@17.203.15.144) (Ping timeout)
  21. # [01:25] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@17.203.15.195)
  22. # [01:25] * Quits: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Where dwelt Ymir, or wherein did he find sustenance?)
  23. # [01:31] * Joins: robburns (robburns@75.31.228.174)
  24. # [01:32] * Quits: jbarnett_ (jbarnett@71.159.54.54) (Ping timeout)
  25. # [01:32] * Joins: jbarnett_ (jbarnett@71.159.54.54)
  26. # [01:33] * Joins: hyatt (hyatt@17.203.15.200)
  27. # [01:35] * Quits: robburns (robburns@75.31.228.174) (Ping timeout)
  28. # [01:42] * Quits: mitzpettel (mitz@82.166.225.89) (Quit: mitzpettel)
  29. # [01:46] * Joins: matt (matt@128.30.52.30)
  30. # [01:47] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@17.203.15.195) (Client exited)
  31. # [01:47] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@17.203.15.195)
  32. # [01:47] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@17.203.15.195) (Quit: aroben)
  33. # [01:47] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@17.203.15.195)
  34. # [02:04] * Quits: hyatt (hyatt@17.203.15.200) (Quit: hyatt)
  35. # [02:10] * Joins: heycam (cam@131.113.199.36)
  36. # [02:14] * Joins: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@69.140.40.140)
  37. # [02:14] * Quits: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@69.140.40.140) (Client exited)
  38. # [02:16] * Joins: anne (annevk@81.68.67.12)
  39. # [02:21] <anne> Philip`, www.html5.org is just there because of Dreamhost
  40. # [02:21] <anne> there's no way to not set it up as far as I know (I wish!)
  41. # [02:24] <Philip`> anne: Wrong channel :-p
  42. # [02:26] <anne> yeah, #whatwg doesn't work very well here so I'm not going to bother
  43. # [02:26] <anne> well, not #whatwg specifically, just freenode in general
  44. # [02:27] <Hixie> anne: there is, it's in the panel (site options)
  45. # [02:27] <Philip`> Ah, fair enough
  46. # [02:32] * anne goes to look in the panel
  47. # [02:34] <anne> Hixie, I can only say that both should work or that one should redirect to the other
  48. # [02:34] <anne> Hixie, but maybe I'm missing something
  49. # [02:35] <Hixie> right, isn't that what you want?
  50. # [02:35] <Hixie> oh you want it to not exist at all
  51. # [02:35] <Hixie> i see
  52. # [02:39] * Joins: mjs_ (mjs@17.203.15.144)
  53. # [02:42] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.107.191) (Ping timeout)
  54. # [02:48] * Quits: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228) (Quit: gsnedders)
  55. # [02:52] * Joins: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30)
  56. # [02:55] * Quits: matt (matt@128.30.52.30) (Quit: matt)
  57. # [02:58] * Quits: jonbarnett (barnett@74.194.19.8) (Client exited)
  58. # [03:37] * Joins: olivier (ot@128.30.52.30)
  59. # [03:40] * Quits: heycam (cam@131.113.199.36) (Ping timeout)
  60. # [03:42] * Quits: kingryan (rking3@208.66.64.47) (Ping timeout)
  61. # [04:04] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.176.127)
  62. # [04:04] * Joins: heycam (cam@131.113.199.36)
  63. # [04:13] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  64. # [04:26] * Quits: marcos (chatzilla@131.181.148.226) (Ping timeout)
  65. # [04:38] * Joins: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30)
  66. # [04:41] * Quits: heycam (cam@131.113.199.36) (Quit: bye)
  67. # [04:42] * Joins: kingryan (rking3@64.81.240.149)
  68. # [04:51] * Quits: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30) (Ping timeout)
  69. # [04:56] * Joins: marcos (chatzilla@131.181.148.226)
  70. # [05:09] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@17.203.15.195) (Quit: aroben)
  71. # [05:28] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@17.255.99.217)
  72. # [05:31] <karl> oooh - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6366177.stm
  73. # [05:33] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@74.103.208.221) (Quit: gavin_)
  74. # [05:37] * Joins: aroben_ (adamroben@17.203.15.195)
  75. # [05:39] * Quits: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Where dwelt Ymir, or wherein did he find sustenance?)
  76. # [05:39] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@17.255.99.217) (Ping timeout)
  77. # [05:39] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Less talk, more pimp walk.)
  78. # [05:41] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@74.103.208.221)
  79. # [05:42] * Quits: olivier (ot@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Leaving)
  80. # [06:02] * Quits: aroben_ (adamroben@17.203.15.195) (Quit: aroben_)
  81. # [06:13] * Parts: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.176.127)
  82. # [06:14] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.176.127)
  83. # [06:22] * Quits: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.176.127) (Ping timeout)
  84. # [06:23] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@203.158.54.181)
  85. # [06:31] * Quits: Lachy (lachlan_hu@203.158.54.181) (Ping timeout)
  86. # [06:32] * Joins: Lionhear1 (robin@66.57.69.65)
  87. # [06:37] * Joins: heycam (cam@131.113.199.36)
  88. # [06:38] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  89. # [06:38] * Parts: Lionhear1 (robin@66.57.69.65)
  90. # [06:43] * Joins: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30)
  91. # [06:47] * Joins: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30)
  92. # [07:00] * Quits: heycam (cam@131.113.199.36) (Ping timeout)
  93. # [07:03] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@67.160.250.192)
  94. # [07:19] * Joins: heycam (cam@131.113.199.36)
  95. # [07:39] * Quits: heycam (cam@131.113.199.36) (Quit: bye)
  96. # [07:42] * Joins: schepers_ (schepers@128.30.52.30)
  97. # [07:42] * Quits: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30) (Client exited)
  98. # [07:46] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.189.252)
  99. # [07:53] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@67.160.250.192) (Quit: aroben)
  100. # [07:54] * schepers_ is now known as schepers
  101. # [07:55] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@67.160.250.192)
  102. # [07:58] * Quits: mjs_ (mjs@17.203.15.144) (Quit: mjs_)
  103. # [08:04] * Quits: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Trillian (http://www.ceruleanstudios.com)
  104. # [08:05] * Quits: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Where dwelt Ymir, or wherein did he find sustenance?)
  105. # [08:09] * Joins: mitzpettel (mitz@82.166.241.53)
  106. # [08:11] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Ping timeout)
  107. # [08:34] * Joins: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30)
  108. # [08:34] * Joins: heycam (cam@131.113.199.36)
  109. # [08:37] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  110. # [08:41] * Joins: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30)
  111. # [08:48] * Joins: mjs (mjs@64.81.48.145)
  112. # [08:51] * Joins: olivier (ot@128.30.52.30)
  113. # [09:01] * Quits: heycam (cam@131.113.199.36) (Ping timeout)
  114. # [09:03] * Quits: mitzpettel (mitz@82.166.241.53) (Quit: mitzpettel)
  115. # [09:05] * Joins: tH (Rob@87.102.118.51)
  116. # [09:20] * Joins: heycam (cam@131.113.199.36)
  117. # [09:24] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@67.160.250.192) (Quit: aroben)
  118. # [09:33] * Joins: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228)
  119. # [09:34] * Joins: gsnedders_ (gsnedders@217.42.133.228)
  120. # [09:34] * Quits: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228) (Connection reset by peer)
  121. # [09:34] * gsnedders_ is now known as gsnedders
  122. # [09:36] * Joins: schepers_ (schepers@128.30.52.30)
  123. # [09:36] * Quits: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30) (Client exited)
  124. # [09:44] * Quits: schepers_ (schepers@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Trillian (http://www.ceruleanstudios.com)
  125. # [09:47] * Joins: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30)
  126. # [10:14] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Less talk, more pimp walk.)
  127. # [10:28] * Quits: heycam (cam@131.113.199.36) (Quit: bye)
  128. # [10:34] * Quits: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Where dwelt Ymir, or wherein did he find sustenance?)
  129. # [10:36] * Quits: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30) (Client exited)
  130. # [10:42] * Joins: ROBOd (robod@86.34.246.154)
  131. # [11:01] * Joins: briansuda (briansuda@82.148.47.122)
  132. # [11:32] * Joins: zcorpan_ (zcorpan@88.131.66.80)
  133. # [11:47] * Joins: heycam (cam@221.187.46.123)
  134. # [11:51] * Quits: zcorpan_ (zcorpan@88.131.66.80) (Ping timeout)
  135. # [11:54] * Quits: hober (ted@68.107.112.172) (Quit: ERC Version 5.2 (IRC client for Emacs))
  136. # [12:05] * Quits: laplink (link@193.157.66.70) (Ping timeout)
  137. # [12:05] * Quits: xover (xover@193.157.66.5) (Ping timeout)
  138. # [12:35] * Joins: myakura (myakura@122.29.112.230)
  139. # [12:53] * Quits: sbuluf (dkbt@200.49.140.157) (Ping timeout)
  140. # [13:11] * Joins: hasather (hasather@90.227.221.48)
  141. # [13:13] * Quits: drry_ (drry@222.225.141.185) (Quit: drry_)
  142. # [13:13] * Quits: olivier (ot@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Leaving)
  143. # [13:18] * Joins: drry (drry@210.235.213.76)
  144. # [13:28] * Joins: zcorpan_ (zcorpan@85.227.145.211)
  145. # [13:52] * Quits: ROBOd (robod@86.34.246.154) (Quit: http://www.robodesign.ro )
  146. # [14:05] * Quits: briansuda (briansuda@82.148.47.122) (Quit: briansuda)
  147. # [14:16] * Quits: myakura (myakura@122.29.112.230) (Quit: Leaving...)
  148. # [14:20] * Quits: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.189.252) (Ping timeout)
  149. # [14:24] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
  150. # [14:25] * Joins: ROBOd (robod@86.34.246.154)
  151. # [14:41] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.189.252)
  152. # [14:45] * Quits: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.189.252) (Ping timeout)
  153. # [14:52] * Quits: heycam (cam@221.187.46.123) (Quit: bye)
  154. # [15:12] * Joins: briansuda (briansuda@82.148.47.122)
  155. # [15:15] * Quits: jbarnett_ (jbarnett@71.159.54.54) (Client exited)
  156. # [15:17] * Joins: matt (matt@128.30.52.30)
  157. # [15:40] <anne> It probably makes sense for ref= and template= to be superglobal, unless I'm missing something
  158. # [15:53] * Quits: marcos (chatzilla@131.181.148.226) (Ping timeout)
  159. # [16:05] * Quits: Bob_le_Pointu (mallory@80.248.208.232) (Ping timeout)
  160. # [16:11] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@67.160.250.192)
  161. # [16:19] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.189.252)
  162. # [16:23] * Quits: matt (matt@128.30.52.30) (Quit: matt)
  163. # [16:25] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@67.160.250.192) (Quit: aroben)
  164. # [16:53] <DanC> not many registrants for the ftf http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2007/registrants#html
  165. # [16:54] <DanC> I'm lacking inspiration regarding the agenda
  166. # [16:55] <anne> I'm planning to come, just haven't filled out all kinds of forms yet
  167. # [16:55] <DanC> ah. good to know
  168. # [16:55] <DanC> hixie, was 4 Sep a hard deadline, or is there some wiggle room?
  169. # [16:55] <anne> I suppose Charles might join as well if he doesn't have a conflict
  170. # [16:56] <anne> on his blog he said "this week" (posted September 4)
  171. # [16:57] * DanC is clearly behind on http://people.w3.org/mike/planet/html5/ reading
  172. # [16:57] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@67.160.250.192)
  173. # [16:58] <hsivonen> is the deadline deadline for registering to the f2f or a deadline for deciding whether Hixie participates?
  174. # [16:58] <anne> it was thought to be a deadline for the latter
  175. # [16:59] <anne> there's no real deadline for f2f registration (in my experience) although in general the earlier the better
  176. # [17:00] <DanC> Hixie asked for meeting info/agenda by 4 Sep; I suppose that's motivated by some google travel procedures.
  177. # [17:01] * Joins: matt (matt@128.30.52.30)
  178. # [17:02] <DanC> "pressure to discuss and reach a decision on a topic in 60 minutes or less". grumble. How many times do I have to tell him that we won't make decisions like that?
  179. # [17:03] <DanC> it's in the charter. I've confirmed it in email several times.
  180. # [17:04] <DanC> and we have in practice taken a week to consider each of the 2 formal questions so far. (1 which passed, 1 which did not)
  181. # [17:04] <DanC> that was after a period of considerable discussion.
  182. # [17:04] <DanC> and those weren't even technical issues.
  183. # [17:04] <anne> I guess he's just iterating from past experience
  184. # [17:07] <DanC> so there's no way to get him to believe me?
  185. # [17:10] <anne> you'd have to ask him
  186. # [17:16] <DanC> seems to me that I've done my part. he shouldn't be publishing in his blog stuff that I've gone to such trouble to show won't happen.
  187. # [17:19] <anne> what is going to be discussed then though? or will it be in unconference style?
  188. # [17:22] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@67.160.250.192) (Quit: aroben)
  189. # [17:27] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@67.160.250.192)
  190. # [17:33] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@67.160.250.192) (Quit: aroben)
  191. # [17:40] * DanC is dividing his attention with a GRDDL telcon...
  192. # [17:41] <DanC> good question...
  193. # [18:01] <DanC> I'd like to talk about test suite organization.
  194. # [18:01] <DanC> I think that would be a useful break-out session
  195. # [18:02] <zcorpan_> i've said before that i can help with testsuite org, and i'm still willing to do so, but i'm finding less time for it currently
  196. # [18:06] * DanC suffers a firefox crash
  197. # [18:11] * Quits: briansuda (briansuda@82.148.47.122) (Quit: briansuda)
  198. # [18:12] * Joins: briansuda (briansuda@82.148.47.122)
  199. # [18:12] <Zakim> Zakim gateway process has lost state -- restarting it will require a restart of Zakim-bot. If you're on an active telecon and do *not* want to lose your agenda, please /msg ralphs
  200. # [18:13] <Zakim> ... and let him know
  201. # [18:14] * Quits: kingryan (rking3@64.81.240.149) (Quit: kingryan)
  202. # [18:14] <Zakim> zakim-bot restart in 2 minutes
  203. # [18:15] * Quits: briansuda (briansuda@82.148.47.122) (Ping timeout)
  204. # [18:17] * Quits: Zakim (rrs-bridgg@128.30.52.30) (Client exited)
  205. # [18:19] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@64.9.235.172)
  206. # [18:24] * Quits: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167) (Quit: And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.)
  207. # [18:30] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@64.9.235.172) (Ping timeout)
  208. # [18:31] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@64.9.235.172)
  209. # [18:34] * Quits: aroben (adamroben@64.9.235.172) (Ping timeout)
  210. # [18:34] * Quits: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.189.252) (Ping timeout)
  211. # [18:42] * Quits: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228) (Quit: Don't touch /dev/null…)
  212. # [18:42] * Joins: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228)
  213. # [18:44] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.189.252)
  214. # [18:47] * Parts: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.189.252)
  215. # [18:51] * Joins: hober (ted@68.107.112.172)
  216. # [18:53] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.189.252)
  217. # [18:55] * Joins: myakura (myakura@122.18.229.96)
  218. # [19:17] * Joins: kingryan (rking3@208.66.64.47)
  219. # [19:21] * Joins: Lionheart (robin@198.86.248.1)
  220. # [19:22] * Parts: Lionheart (robin@198.86.248.1)
  221. # [19:32] * Quits: gavin (gavin@63.245.208.169) (Ping timeout)
  222. # [19:33] * Joins: gavin (gavin@63.245.208.169)
  223. # [19:34] * Joins: Chris (cwilso@131.107.0.105)
  224. # [19:36] * Quits: jane (j@76.170.65.146) (Ping timeout)
  225. # [19:43] * Quits: anne (annevk@81.68.67.12) (Ping timeout)
  226. # [20:15] <Hixie> DanC: i can probably handle a delay until friday, but anything after that and it becomes much harder
  227. # [20:16] <DanC> good to know, thanks
  228. # [20:16] <DanC> I think I should get something out tomorrow
  229. # [20:16] <DanC> I'm playing phone tag with Chris W.
  230. # [20:17] <Hixie> re my blog, i was just talking about the kind of thing that i don't think would work, i don't think i said it was what you'd said we'd do
  231. # [20:18] * Joins: kingryan_ (rking3@208.66.64.47)
  232. # [20:20] <Chris> hey, I'm right here.
  233. # [20:20] * Quits: kingryan (rking3@208.66.64.47) (Ping timeout)
  234. # [20:20] <Chris> [test]
  235. # [20:21] <gavin> [PASS]
  236. # [20:21] <Chris> :)
  237. # [20:22] * Hixie notes that "<DanC> I'm lacking inspiration regarding the agenda" probably indicates things are backwards... wouldn't a F2F only be even considered after there was a clear reason for having a F2F?
  238. # [20:22] <DanC> I sorta misspoke... I'm a little overwhelmed with all the stuff that should go on the agenda, and the prospect of putting it on one page
  239. # [20:23] * DanC divides attention with a phone call
  240. # [20:23] <Chris> no. We have a ton of work to do. I believe that work needs to be a cooperative effort, with a bunch of people involved. A FTF is a good place to do that. Distilling that in to a specific agenda is a challenge.
  241. # [20:23] * Quits: kingryan_ (rking3@208.66.64.47) (Client exited)
  242. # [20:24] * Joins: aroben (adamroben@17.203.15.195)
  243. # [20:24] * Joins: kingryan (rking3@208.66.64.47)
  244. # [20:25] <DanC> sometimes chatting with Zakim about the agenda works...
  245. # [20:25] * Joins: Zakim (rrs-bridgg@128.30.52.30)
  246. # [20:25] <DanC> agenda + convene ftf meeting
  247. # [20:25] * Zakim notes agendum 1 added
  248. # [20:25] <DanC> agenda + versioning
  249. # [20:25] * Zakim notes agendum 2 added
  250. # [20:25] <DanC> agenda + teaching HTML 5, preserving progress on XHTML+CSS
  251. # [20:25] * Zakim notes agendum 3 added
  252. # [20:26] * Chris is now known as ChrisWilson
  253. # [20:26] <DanC> agenda + test suite organization (maybe a break-out group)
  254. # [20:26] * Zakim notes agendum 4 added
  255. # [20:27] <DanC> I'd like to think design principles will be old news by then
  256. # [20:28] <DanC> though maybe refining them to requirements is worthwhile? a discussion of scope/requirements/schedule would be nice... though that might be too broad...
  257. # [20:28] * Quits: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228) (Quit: gsnedders)
  258. # [20:29] <DanC> ChrisWilson, have you and Sam Ruby found time to chat?
  259. # [20:29] <Hixie> if there really are a lot of discussion topics, it sounds like an unconference is ideal for it :-)
  260. # [20:30] <DanC> I haven't seen much support for the unconference idea. not explictly, anyway. And I have a handful of requests to know what we're talking about when.
  261. # [20:31] <DanC> agenda + Offline Web Apps [Hixie]
  262. # [20:31] * Zakim notes agendum 5 added
  263. # [20:32] <Hixie> Offline Web Apps?
  264. # [20:33] <DanC> yes, as in your message of 24 Aug 2007
  265. # [20:34] <Hixie> won't that be long done by then?
  266. # [20:35] <DanC> hmm... well, I'd be happy to work on tests for the design, if it's mature by then
  267. # [20:36] <Hixie> even if it wasn't going to be done by then, i don't understand why we would want to discuss it in person, i mean, it's a design thing, it takes long and careful deliberation alone in front of a whiteboard with everyone's feedback and no distractions
  268. # [20:36] <Hixie> and it seems like a huge cost to the environment to have people fly to boston just to write tests
  269. # [20:37] <kingryan> DanC: I'm with hixie on this one– we don't need to meet f2f to work on tests
  270. # [20:37] <DanC> well, not so much writing tests, but designing the test hypothesis
  271. # [20:37] <Hixie> what's a test hypothesis?
  272. # [20:37] <ChrisWilson> "deliberation alone" is not the way to write open specs.
  273. # [20:37] <kingryan> we've already got a good deal of parsing tests, which have been developed entirely distributed
  274. # [20:38] <Hixie> ChrisWilson: i disagree, i think having seen the result of design-by-committee and the result of design-by-lone-editor-working-to-address-everyone's-feedback, the former results in orders of magnitude poorer quality specs.
  275. # [20:38] <DanC> the parsing tests are coming along nicely, in a way, but they're not done, and nobody has tried to explain them to the WG.
  276. # [20:38] <kingryan> ChrisWilson: isn't that part of the process? it's certainly not everything but I think there's a time for sitting alone and thinking through everything and working out the problems
  277. # [20:38] <DanC> yes, design is best done in small groups or alone.
  278. # [20:38] <kingryan> DanC: explanation? explain. :)
  279. # [20:38] <ChrisWilson> define your metrics for "poorer quality". I'm not advocating pure design-by-committee. I'm advocating against design dictation.
  280. # [20:39] <Hixie> ChrisWilson: trying to design things around a table invariably results in group-think and overlooking critical issues. just look at the number of things microsoft is trying to change with the margin collapsing rules in css2.1, which were the result of group think.
  281. # [20:39] <kingryan> ChrisWilson: no one is suggesting dictation. just editorship. (if that's a word)
  282. # [20:39] <ChrisWilson> DanC - yes, I spoke with Sam.
  283. # [20:40] * Joins: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228)
  284. # [20:40] <ChrisWilson> I understand that writing the spec is a singular task. Only one person can type. Figuring out what the spec should cover, and discussing issues like, oh, say, the DOCTYPE, or the need or lack thereof for a <video> element, is a group activity.
  285. # [20:40] * Quits: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228) (Quit: Don't touch /dev/null…)
  286. # [20:41] <DanC> kingryan, by way of example, see http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/test_results and http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/ and such. now those started as scribbly directories of files...
  287. # [20:41] <Hixie> i don't see why it's a group activity that is best done around a table. it seems like it's best done by having everyone put forward their requirements and any relevant data, and having that be used as a rational guide to what the spec should say.
  288. # [20:42] <Hixie> how can discussion around a table possibly end up in the issues being better considered?
  289. # [20:42] <kingryan> DanC: at what point where those documents created?
  290. # [20:43] <Hixie> a face-to-face meeting can be great for brainstorming ideas, but only in very small unstructured groups (half a dozen people at most, just buzzing around a whiteboard)
  291. # [20:43] <ChrisWilson> um, because there are always compromises unless there is only one person's input driving decision making?
  292. # [20:43] <Hixie> imho
  293. # [20:43] <DanC> the owl tests started with one mail message from me with a test sketch, as input to an issue. at some point, a couple people started collected test cases and Jeremy Carroll wrote a little explanation so that other people could understand how the tests worked.
  294. # [20:43] <Hixie> the best designs are the ones that don't need to compromise on anyone's requirements, and the way to do that is rarely seen when you're in a time-pressured table discussion.
  295. # [20:44] <Hixie> when compromises really have to be made, e.g. because the requirements are incompatible, you really want a long and careful consideration of all the data in hand to make the decision
  296. # [20:44] <Hixie> again, time-pressured table discussion is far from the right medium for that kind of decision
  297. # [20:44] <ChrisWilson> What you end up designing by interpreting a "rational guide" would be different than what I would end up designing by interpreting the same "rational guide". True or false?
  298. # [20:44] <DanC> I agree that design is not something to do in a meeting, but consider the versioning stuff. We clearly have irreconcilable requirements. So we have to decide which requirements to accept.
  299. # [20:44] <ChrisWilson> who considers?
  300. # [20:44] <ChrisWilson> yes, exactly.
  301. # [20:45] <Hixie> DanC: the versioning stuff is a great example. what could a meeting possibly do to change the data?
  302. # [20:45] <DanC> it could help more people absorb the data that's been given...
  303. # [20:46] <DanC> ... and clear up misunderstandings
  304. # [20:46] <kingryan> "more people"? I doubt that a significant portion of the WG could make it to any f2f.
  305. # [20:46] <DanC> right; different people. "more" is not the goal.
  306. # [20:47] <DanC> the goal is a critical mass. (that's one goal, anyway)
  307. # [20:47] <Hixie> DanC: i am very skeptical that people are more able to absorb data when in a time-constrained situation than when they are in a comfortable and relaxed atmosphere of their chosing
  308. # [20:47] <ChrisWilson> people absorbing the data is the goal, not just people on a mailing list where the data is giving.
  309. # [20:48] <Hixie> DanC: and i don't really see what misunderstandings there could be about the versioning, i'm pretty sure all the data has been made very clear indeed.
  310. # [20:48] <ChrisWilson> there is no more time-constrained situation to me than attempting to read through the 50 or so daily emails in the HTML WG list. Serialization of important issues to force focus does seem to be a good idea to me.
  311. # [20:49] <ChrisWilson> *back in ten*
  312. # [20:49] <DanC> email is such a low-bandwidth medium. communication is mostly non-verbal. even machines grok text 80% better when they have the chance to ask clarification questions. (a cyc research result).
  313. # [20:50] <Hixie> why not just take three days to read the relevant e-mails then, instead of taking three days to fly everyone to one location and then have them talk about the e-mails without everyone able to participate?
  314. # [20:50] <Hixie> that seems like a problem with time management, not a problem that should be solved by dumping carbon in the atmosphere.
  315. # [20:52] <DanC> speaking of time management, I doubt it's useful for us to debate the value of face-to-face meetings in general. Chris and I owe the WG an agenda. You'd like it this week. That's a goal I share. Then I guess I'll leave it to you to decide whether to come.
  316. # [20:55] <hober> FWIW, re: lack of explicit support for an unconference-style f2f - I'd try to attend an unconference-style f2f, but probably wouldn't attend otherwise.
  317. # [20:56] <Hixie> maciej was the one who originally suggested it (on one of the surveys), too
  318. # [20:56] <DanC> ah. good to know. what's your experience with unconference meetings, hober?
  319. # [20:57] <DanC> Hixie, is there anything I'd need to know in order to run the meeting un-conference style?
  320. # [20:57] <DanC> hmm... I wonder what we'd get by way of meeting records.
  321. # [20:57] <hober> I've been to several BarCamps, as well as TagCamp and a WordCamp.
  322. # [20:57] * jgraham suggests that the value of a f2f might be largely social i.e. it's easier to work remotely with people who you have met in person
  323. # [20:57] <hober> Also, I helped organize & run a BarCamp.
  324. # [20:58] <hober> jgraham: agreed
  325. # [20:58] <matt> +1 jgraham
  326. # [20:58] <DanC> +1 easier to work remotely with people who you have met in person
  327. # [20:58] <Hixie> jgraham: agreed, that's why i think it's important to have an unconference-style meeting, where the social aspect is much stronger
  328. # [20:59] <Hixie> DanC: not really... basically you would start off with everyone introducing themselves, then you have a big whiteboard with the (originally empty) schedule for N rooms and M sessions, say one-hour sessions in p/6 rooms where p is the number of participants
  329. # [20:59] <Hixie> DanC: you let people fill in the schedule (e.g. with large post-its or just by writing on the whiteboard) and then you start the sessions and people go to whatever looks interesting
  330. # [21:00] <Hixie> DanC: if you want a record you can have the person who proposed each session write a summary of that session and send it to the list
  331. # [21:00] <Hixie> hober: is what i just described about right?
  332. # [21:00] <DanC> yeah, hober, does that match your experience?
  333. # [21:01] <kingryan> I'm not hober, but that matches my experience
  334. # [21:01] <kingryan> (I helped organize the first barcamp)
  335. # [21:01] <jgraham> DanC: That's basically what happened at the BarCamp I went to (except we didn't have enough people for M>1)
  336. # [21:02] <kingryan> the idea is to make the whole session organization a market-thing
  337. # [21:02] <Hixie> yeah i think we'd want at least 12-20 people, ideally more
  338. # [21:02] <ChrisWilson> *back*
  339. # [21:02] <DanC> 12-20 people in the whole meeting? or in each session?
  340. # [21:03] <Hixie> whole thing
  341. # [21:03] <Hixie> sessions would probably be ~6 each, though that depends on the session's popularity of course
  342. # [21:03] * DanC missed "ideally more" on 1st reading
  343. # [21:04] <hober> Hixie: yes, that's about right
  344. # [21:04] <Hixie> scifoo camp (for which i was a docent) had ~200 people, iirc
  345. # [21:05] * DanC looks up "docent"...
  346. # [21:05] <Hixie> guide
  347. # [21:05] <Hixie> or cat herder, in the case of scifoo :-)
  348. # [21:06] * DanC asks meeting organization people about space for break-out groups; gets vaguely positive reponse
  349. # [21:07] <DanC> 1 hour seems short. is that typical? is there much variation?
  350. # [21:07] <Hixie> we wouldn't need much, like i said at some point earlier we could easily do these in the corridors, it would even encourage other people to participate which would be great
  351. # [21:08] <Hixie> just need a whiteboard or other writing surface really
  352. # [21:08] <DanC> noodling... 4 90minute sessions seems kinda natural: 9-10:30, 11-12:30, 2-3:30, 4-5:30
  353. # [21:09] <Hixie> i think i'd head more towards 45 minutes with 15 minute intermissions than 90 minutes with 30 minute intermissions, you want the discussion to stay pretty focussed
  354. # [21:09] <Hixie> but i don't have much experience with the timing issue
  355. # [21:09] <Hixie> hober, jgraham, and kingryan can probably have better input there
  356. # [21:10] <hober> Usually I've seen 30m or 60m sessions
  357. # [21:10] <kingryan> in my experience, flexibility is key
  358. # [21:10] <kingryan> if there's on interest in a topic, there might not be 60m worth of discussion
  359. # [21:10] <DanC> er... shorter sessions are more focussed? that's counter-intuitive. help?
  360. # [21:11] <kingryan> but interesting topics could be talked about for hours
  361. # [21:11] <DanC> oh. hmm.
  362. # [21:11] <DanC> so what happens when a topic wants to go for more than the scheduled time? you just let it?
  363. # [21:11] <Hixie> i guess you get someone to run to the agenda and move the post-its around :-)
  364. # [21:11] <hober> it's ok, assuming there's space available
  365. # [21:13] * Hixie tries e-mailing freedom scientific with some test cases for bugs in jaws 8 that he found
  366. # [21:13] <DanC> does it seem useful to pre-seed the NxM schedule thing using a web form?
  367. # [21:13] <kingryan> DanC: some barcamps have done that, I'm not sure what the results were, but I could ask around
  368. # [21:13] <Hixie> from what i've heard it works better if it's completely organic
  369. # [21:13] <Hixie> but i'd be interested in feedback from people who've tried it, yeah
  370. # [21:14] <DanC> do the post-it proposers get 2 minutes to pitch their sessions? I seem to recall something about that
  371. # [21:15] <DanC> "it's possible HTML could use 3 rooms total" , says a meeting organization person
  372. # [21:16] <Hixie> nice
  373. # [21:16] <Hixie> we could easily fit two groups per room
  374. # [21:16] <Hixie> maybe more if they're big rooms
  375. # [21:16] <Hixie> (though maybe only 1 if they're the bedrooms)
  376. # [21:16] <Hixie> if we only get ~18 people, 3 rooms is great
  377. # [21:17] * DanC expects more like 40
  378. # [21:17] <DanC> though some of those are "observers" that I could, in theory turn away
  379. # [21:17] <Hixie> that would be 4-6 groups, which should fit in 3 rooms fine if they're medium-sized, and would fit in 3 rooms + corridor space otherwise
  380. # [21:18] <Hixie> i'd encourage people to not be observers but to just take part :-)
  381. # [21:18] <Hixie> the more the better
  382. # [21:18] <ChrisWilson> "observers" in the not-a-WG-member sense.
  383. # [21:18] <Hixie> right
  384. # [21:19] <DanC> some people really do want to watch a meeting as if it were a movie or something. I don't feel much obligation to meet that desire.
  385. # [21:19] <Hixie> watching an unconference doesn't really work in my experience
  386. # [21:19] <Hixie> but yeah
  387. # [21:19] <Hixie> they can watch the agenda :-P
  388. # [21:20] * Joins: anne (annevk@86.90.70.28)
  389. # [21:20] * Quits: myakura (myakura@122.18.229.96) (Quit: Leaving...)
  390. # [21:24] <kingryan> I agree that there's no need to meet that need. spectators don't usually provide anything constructive.
  391. # [21:33] * anne likes the idea he read in the archive
  392. # [21:37] <DanC> hmm... lightning talks... I'd like one on "this end of webkit is up" and such
  393. # [21:43] * Joins: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228)
  394. # [21:44] <DanC> I think I'd like to have some short presentations on Thursday, in addition to the introductions...
  395. # [21:45] <DanC> and maybe have some large-group requirements discussion on Saturday.
  396. # [21:45] <DanC> but I'm game for unconference on Friday and some of Thursday
  397. # [21:47] <ChrisWilson> yes. If we don't fill Thursday afternoon with introductions and short-talks, I'm happy to fill the remainder with UC rounds.
  398. # [21:47] <DanC> kingryan, Hixie, hober, does that seem workable?
  399. # [21:47] <kingryan> it does
  400. # [21:51] <hober> I think that sounds reasonable
  401. # [21:54] <Hixie> DanC: seems good to me
  402. # [21:55] <DanC> ah... just as I finished a sketch: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/nov07
  403. # [21:58] <DanC> 1.2 has a bit more timing info
  404. # [21:58] <DanC> ok... I'll noodle on it a bit more and send it to the WG today or tomorrow.
  405. # [22:01] * Quits: Lachy (lachlan_hu@124.170.189.252) (Quit: Lachy)
  406. # [22:02] * Joins: Lachy (chatzilla@124.170.98.135)
  407. # [22:05] <ChrisWilson> sounds great.
  408. # [22:14] <gsnedders> ChrisWilson: I'm working on a spec defining parsing of HTTP responses/requests, is there any chance of being put in touch with the person responsible for that within IE?
  409. # [22:19] <ChrisWilson> Sure. Send me an email (cwilso@microsoft.com), I'll hook you up.
  410. # [22:20] <gsnedders> ChrisWilson: thanks (though with all my schoolwork that email might not come too quickly)
  411. # [22:25] <Hixie> do we have a list available anywhere of who has said they want to go to the htmlwg f2f meeting?
  412. # [22:26] <anne> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2007/registrants#html
  413. # [22:26] <ChrisWilson> beat me to it.
  414. # [22:26] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
  415. # [22:27] <Hixie> ah excellent, thanks
  416. # [22:27] * Quits: ROBOd (robod@86.34.246.154) (Quit: http://www.robodesign.ro )
  417. # [22:28] <anne> seems that some people on the WG also requested observer status...
  418. # [22:31] * Joins: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30)
  419. # [22:32] <ChrisWilson> yeah, the form was a little confusing.
  420. # [22:34] * DanC wanders off...
  421. # [22:44] <karl> hmm looks like fear of social relationships - http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/html-wg/20070905#l-307
  422. # [22:48] * karl violently agrees with http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/html-wg/20070905#l-322
  423. # [22:50] * jgraham is scared of karl being violent ;)
  424. # [22:52] <karl> jgraham: you should not. ;)
  425. # [22:52] * Joins: billmason (billmason@69.30.57.156)
  426. # [22:52] <karl> I'm really against any kind of violence.
  427. # [22:52] <jgraham> :)
  428. # [22:55] <karl> but I really like to meet people. It gives a different light on what and who they are and that's often worthwhile.
  429. # [22:56] <jgraham> Totally. I just wish I had a way of funding a trip to the f2f :(
  430. # [22:56] <karl> yes that's understandable
  431. # [22:56] <ChrisWilson> BTW, Hixie, the CSS margin collapsing rules were originally the brainchilden of Hkon and Bert, not groupthink.
  432. # [22:57] <karl> jgraham: do you know people around your area participating or not participating to the HTML WG?
  433. # [22:57] <karl> not participating but interested in HTML work
  434. # [22:57] <jgraham> karl: Well depending on what you mean "know"
  435. # [22:59] <Hixie> ChrisWilson: the original vague rules were, the current rules are the result of a 10 hour meeting in oslo
  436. # [22:59] <karl> :) if geographically you could gather a meeting in an un-conference style for one day with good food and good drinks and pick up a few topics to discuss, it would be a way to participate remotely and to build/start a local community with people sharing interests
  437. # [23:00] * karl has a phone meeting in one minute
  438. # [23:00] <anne> should have a meeting in NL some day...
  439. # [23:02] * karl is awake since 4:30am, it is 6am now :) sun has rised. Nature is slowly stretching in the morning light. Sorry for the lyrical stance
  440. # [23:13] <gsnedders> anne: have a meeting somewhere where I might actually be able to get to? what an outragous idea
  441. # [23:13] <ChrisWilson> heh
  442. # [23:13] <ChrisWilson> hey, it's not like it's in Seattle for me either, you know. :)
  443. # [23:14] <gsnedders> ChrisWilson: at least your in the right continent
  444. # [23:14] <gsnedders> you're a local compared with someone who has been to the USA once in their life :)
  445. # [23:14] <ChrisWilson> The other end. It's like a 6 hour flight.
  446. # [23:14] <ChrisWilson> heh
  447. # [23:14] <gsnedders> It's like an 11 hour flight.
  448. # [23:15] <gsnedders> NL would be around 2
  449. # [23:15] <ChrisWilson> really? it's a 10 hour flight from here to London, IIRC. I know it goes up over Greenland, but even so.
  450. # [23:15] <Philip`> You should be thankful that it's in the correct hemisphere :-)
  451. # [23:15] * DanC enjoyed SPARQL meetings in Amsterdam, Helsinki http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf1 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf4.html
  452. # [23:15] <gsnedders> ChrisWilson: I can't remember exactly. It's 9 at the least, as it all goes over the Arctic its pretty similar for the entire US
  453. # [23:16] <ChrisWilson> hey, my next trip is to Web Directions South later this month - that's like 18 hours worth of travel for me.
  454. # [23:16] <ChrisWilson> (each way)
  455. # [23:16] <gsnedders> ChrisWilson: then I have the issue of actually get to an airport which flies to the US
  456. # [23:17] <gsnedders> *getting
  457. # [23:17] <anne> Boston is 8-9 hours
  458. # [23:17] <gsnedders> ChrisWilson: which for some places in the US means going to London, a 1.5 hour flight, after 1 hour driving to the airport
  459. # [23:18] <jgraham> After a certain point the length of the flight makes little difference (in my limited) experience
  460. # [23:18] <jgraham> Like the trauma goes like ln(time)
  461. # [23:19] <gsnedders> I've only flown truly long distance twice — outwards to LA, back from Boston
  462. # [23:19] <DanC> yeah; the actual flying is easy. it's waiting in airports and bus terminals and security lines that sucks
  463. # [23:19] <anne> maybe that's why chaals survives
  464. # [23:19] <ChrisWilson> That's about right. Or, more to the point, the trauma = x + ln(t), where x is the constant associated with getting to the airport, getting checked in and thru security.
  465. # [23:19] <anne> being in a continuous state of flying
  466. # [23:19] <gsnedders> > 12 hours from my nearest airport to Boston
  467. # [23:19] <DanC> crossing lots of timezones sucks too
  468. # [23:20] <gsnedders> but that of course includes hours changing at LHR (huk)
  469. # [23:20] <gsnedders> *yuk
  470. # [23:20] <ChrisWilson> huk works too.
  471. # [23:20] <ChrisWilson> :)
  472. # [23:21] * gsnedders looks up times from Glasgow and Prestwick
  473. # [23:21] <gsnedders> from glasgow shortest is 10hr 10min (changing at LHR)
  474. # [23:21] * Quits: matt (matt@128.30.52.30) (Quit: matt)
  475. # [23:23] <anne> hmm, for some reason I thought gsnedders was from FR
  476. # [23:23] <gsnedders> anne: St Andrews, Scotland
  477. # [23:24] <gsnedders> anne: it'd be even easier to get from most of FR to NL
  478. # [23:24] <ChrisWilson> well, and you can pick up flights from Paris to most of the US anyway
  479. # [23:25] <gsnedders> yeah, but getting to Paris is stupidly expensive
  480. # [23:25] <anne> and the wrong way :)
  481. # [23:25] <gsnedders> (I'm going in October, and have to get across half of Paris to meet my sister)
  482. # [23:25] <ChrisWilson> right. I meant if you were already in France.
  483. # [23:25] * Quits: drry (drry@210.235.213.76) (Quit: drry)
  484. # [23:25] <gsnedders> who, anne, to confuse you further, lives in Berlin
  485. # [23:26] <anne> although I did do Oslo -> Paris -> Atlanta -> Seattle once...
  486. # [23:26] <ChrisWilson> Oh, wait, I can beat that.
  487. # [23:27] <ChrisWilson> I once did Illinois->Seattle->Dublin->Cork->Dublin->WashingtonDC->Seattle->St.Louis->Illinois.
  488. # [23:27] <ChrisWilson> (as a round trip)
  489. # [23:27] <ChrisWilson> the return flights were like 36 hours of travel.
  490. # [23:27] <anne> ouch
  491. # [23:27] * Joins: drry (drry@210.235.213.76)
  492. # [23:27] * jgraham notes that St Andrews may be inaccessible but it does have an excellent sweet shop
  493. # [23:27] <ChrisWilson> The University I worked for had a very strict travel policy
  494. # [23:28] <gsnedders> jgraham: I actually avoided that all of summer just because I girl from school who I absolutely hate worked there three days a week :P
  495. # [23:31] <gsnedders> (it's probably advisable that you don't ask why I hate her — although it's a somewhat funny story, it's also very long)
  496. # [23:32] <gsnedders> ChrisWilson: strict in what way? airlines?
  497. # [23:32] <jgraham> Just a US-carrier-only policy or something worse?
  498. # [23:36] <ChrisWilson> gsnedders: I was doing a 2-stop trip, and they would only book as 2 round-trips because of cost. So on the way back, I had to go all the way to Seattle before heading back to Illinois (for reference, that's about 8-9 hours extra travel)
  499. # [23:38] <gsnedders> ChrisWilson: ah. at least there's _some_ sense in that.
  500. # [23:40] * Parts: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228)
  501. # [23:41] * Joins: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.42.133.228)
  502. # [23:41] <gsnedders> note to self: command+w on the wrong window is annoying
  503. # [23:43] * Quits: mjs (mjs@64.81.48.145) (Quit: mjs)
  504. # [23:46] * Joins: Lionheart (robin@66.57.69.65)
  505. # [23:53] * Quits: anne (annevk@86.90.70.28) (Ping timeout)
  506. # Session Close: Thu Sep 06 00:00:00 2007

The end :)