/irc-logs / w3c / #html-wg / 2009-04-16 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Thu Apr 16 00:00:00 2009
  2. # Session Ident: #html-wg
  3. # [00:20] <pimpbot> changes: more IRC comments from markp <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-diffs/2009Apr/0055.html> ** editorial comments from markp and zcorpan; ta\! <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-diffs/2009Apr/0054.html>
  4. # [00:49] * Quits: heycam (cam@124.168.113.60) (Ping timeout)
  5. # [00:57] * Quits: maddiin (mc@87.185.232.228) (Quit: maddiin)
  6. # [01:03] * Quits: aroben (aroben@71.58.77.15) (Connection reset by peer)
  7. # [01:21] * Joins: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@67.154.87.254)
  8. # [01:32] * Quits: MichaelC (Michael@128.30.52.30) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.84 [Firefox 3.0.8/2009032609])
  9. # [01:49] * Quits: karl (karlcow@128.30.54.58) (Quit: O public road, I say back I am not afraid to leave you, yet I love you, you express me better than I can express myself.)
  10. # [01:50] * Joins: heycam (cam@130.194.73.110)
  11. # [02:02] * Joins: karl (karlcow@128.30.54.58)
  12. # [02:23] * Quits: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@67.154.87.254) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  13. # [03:28] * Quits: adele (adele@17.246.18.119) (Quit: adele)
  14. # [04:01] * Joins: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@68.50.195.181)
  15. # [04:04] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.207.11) (Ping timeout)
  16. # [04:05] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.207.11)
  17. # [04:36] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  18. # [05:04] <MikeSmith> @changes
  19. # [05:04] <pimpbot> MikeSmith: more IRC comments from markp <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-diffs/2009Apr/0055.html> ** editorial comments from markp and zcorpan; ta\! <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-diffs/2009Apr/0054.html> ** add the previous edition <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-diffs/2009Apr/0053.html> ** update html5-diff to take into account the latest edits (10 more messages)
  20. # [05:07] * Quits: heycam (cam@130.194.73.110) (Quit: bye)
  21. # [05:24] * Quits: dbaron (dbaron@63.245.220.241) (Quit: 8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.)
  22. # [05:32] * Joins: heycam (cam@130.194.73.110)
  23. # [05:40] * Quits: Julian (chatzilla@217.91.35.233) (Ping timeout)
  24. # [05:40] * Joins: Julian (chatzilla@217.91.35.233)
  25. # [07:55] * Quits: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@68.50.195.181) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  26. # [08:33] * Quits: heycam (cam@130.194.73.110) (Ping timeout)
  27. # [09:28] * Joins: heycam (cam@210.84.43.19)
  28. # [09:49] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.207.11) (Ping timeout)
  29. # [10:13] * Joins: dsinger (dsinger@147.83.30.72)
  30. # [10:14] * Joins: tlr (tlr@128.30.52.28)
  31. # [10:25] * Parts: dsinger (dsinger@147.83.30.72)
  32. # [10:51] * Joins: ROBOd (robod@89.122.216.38)
  33. # [11:27] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  34. # [11:51] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22)
  35. # [12:24] <MikeSmith> nico: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/index
  36. # [12:24] <pimpbot> Title: HTML 5 (at www.whatwg.org)
  37. # [12:25] <MikeSmith> http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker
  38. # [12:25] <pimpbot> Title: (X)HTML5 Tracking (at html5.org)
  39. # [12:26] <MikeSmith> http://svn.whatwg.org/webapps/
  40. # [12:26] <pimpbot> Title: Revision 2961: / (at svn.whatwg.org)
  41. # [12:27] <MikeSmith> http://svn.whatwg.org/webapps/source
  42. # [12:29] <MikeSmith> http://dev.w3.org/html5/html4-differences
  43. # [12:29] <pimpbot> Title: HTML 5 differences from HTML 4 (at dev.w3.org)
  44. # [12:29] <nico> http://hsivonen.iki.fi/thesis/html5-conformance-checker.xhtml#future-work
  45. # [12:30] <pimpbot> Title: An HTML5 Conformance Checker (at hsivonen.iki.fi)
  46. # [12:32] <MikeSmith> http://dev.w3.org/html5/html-author/
  47. # [12:32] <pimpbot> Title: HTML 5 Reference (at dev.w3.org)
  48. # [12:33] * Joins: myakura (myakura@122.29.116.63)
  49. # [12:34] <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/markup-spec/
  50. # [12:34] <pimpbot> Title: HTML 5: The Markup Language (at www.w3.org)
  51. # [12:36] * Joins: dsinger (dsinger@147.83.30.72)
  52. # [12:37] * Parts: dsinger (dsinger@147.83.30.72)
  53. # [13:04] <MikeSmith> http://validator.nu/?=&doc=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.w3.org%2Fhtml5%2Ftests%2Fvalidation%2Ffull%2Finvalid%2Funknown-attribute%2Fblockquote.html
  54. # [13:04] <pimpbot> Title: Validation results for http://dev.w3.org/html5/tests/validation/full/invalid/unknown-attribute/blockquote.html (at validator.nu)
  55. # [13:05] <anne> "at this point"?
  56. # [13:06] <anne> also "Element-specific attributes for element blockquote:" prolly needs changing now "Global attributes" is listed
  57. # [13:10] <MikeSmith> yeah, "Element-specific attributes" part is hard-coded into the spec-builder (spec-scraper) code
  58. # [13:10] <MikeSmith> because that's the subhead the spec used to ahve
  59. # [13:10] <MikeSmith> the spec now has just "Content attributes" as the title for that subsection, I think
  60. # [13:12] <MikeSmith> anne: I would guess that the "at this point" part is coming straight from jing (no from v.nu code)
  61. # [13:13] <hsivonen> anne: "at this point" means that Jing isn't making a claim on whether the same nesting could be allowed with different ancestors or previous siblings
  62. # [13:32] <anne> I guess that if you really want real good error messages you have to implement the RNG bit in Java instead...
  63. # [13:36] * Joins: maddiin (mc@87.185.249.155)
  64. # [13:37] <MikeSmith> anne: or refine jing, or develop an alternative RNG checker
  65. # [13:37] <MikeSmith> David Tolpin's rnv checker produces better error messages for some cases
  66. # [13:38] <MikeSmith> anne: I was taking it that you mean not using an RNG schema at all, but implementing the constraint-checking completely in custom Java code
  67. # [13:42] <MikeSmith> http://jing-trang.googlecode.com/svn/branches/validator-nu/mod/rng-validate/src/main/com/thaiopensource/relaxng/impl/resources/Messages.properties
  68. # [13:43] <anne> yeah
  69. # [13:43] <MikeSmith> "impossible_attribute_ignored=Attribute {0} not allowed on element {1} at this point."
  70. # [13:49] <MikeSmith> hsivonen: "in this context" might be slightly better for this case
  71. # [14:01] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: yeah
  72. # [14:02] <hsivonen> I'll fix that right away
  73. # [14:02] * Joins: MichaelC (Michael@128.30.52.30)
  74. # [14:02] <MikeSmith> hsivonen: I see that you already refined that particular message over what is was previously
  75. # [14:05] <MikeSmith> -impossible_attribute_ignored=Attribute {0} not allowed at this point; ignored.
  76. # [14:05] <MikeSmith> +impossible_attribute_ignored=Attribute {0} not allowed on element {1} at this point.
  77. # [14:05] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Tomorrow to fresh woods, and pastures new.)
  78. # [14:08] <hsivonen> anne: upstream still pending but bug not abandoned: http://code.google.com/p/jing-trang/issues/detail?id=35
  79. # [14:08] <pimpbot> Title: Issue 35 - jing-trang - Provide more information for missing required attributes/elements errors - Google Code (at code.google.com)
  80. # [14:08] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  81. # [14:09] <hsivonen> what's the difference between "Windows" and "Windows Classic" Opera platforms?
  82. # [14:14] * Joins: DanC_lap (connolly@128.30.52.30)
  83. # [14:14] <MikeSmith> hsivonen: maybe Windows Classic = Windows 98?
  84. # [14:15] * DanC_lap tunes in after a nice, long Easter break
  85. # [14:15] * Quits: maddiin (mc@87.185.249.155) (Quit: maddiin)
  86. # [14:15] <DanC_lap> I have a conflict with today's telcon.
  87. # [14:15] * DanC_lap reviews the agenda... http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/agenda
  88. # [14:15] * DanC_lap reviews Hixie's input on the agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Apr/0179.html
  89. # [14:15] <MikeSmith> DanC_lap: <hsivonen> does DanC's URL spec have a permalink yet?
  90. # [14:15] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: could be
  91. # [14:16] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: I checked in the Jing message change
  92. # [14:16] <MikeSmith> DanC_lap: <hsivonen> http://homer.w3.org/~connolly/projects/urlp/raw-file/008373680cae/wah5/draft.html is 403 for me
  93. # [14:16] <MikeSmith> hsivonen: cool
  94. # [14:16] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: deployment script still running
  95. # [14:16] <DanC_lap> permalink... no, not yet, sorry
  96. # [14:16] <MikeSmith> k
  97. # [14:16] <hsivonen> DanC_lap: ok
  98. # [14:16] <Philip> hsivonen: I think the difference is the installer, not the program
  99. # [14:16] <DanC_lap> and yeah... ~connolly/projects went 403 and I know not why
  100. # [14:17] <Philip> like the Classic one is some old-fashioned installation program, and the other one is based on the Microsoft Installer stuff
  101. # [14:17] <hsivonen> Philip: why bother shipping multiple installers?
  102. # [14:17] * DanC_lap sees ISSUE-32 (table-summary) high on the agenda... hope Sam has a plan that doesn't need me
  103. # [14:17] <Philip> hsivonen: Maybe some people have old Windowses that are incompatible with the Microsoft Installer, or something
  104. # [14:18] * Joins: maddiin (mc@87.185.249.155)
  105. # [14:18] <DanC_lap> has Matt May been at any recent telcons, MikeSmith?
  106. # [14:18] <MikeSmith> DanC_lap: maybe, can't remember
  107. # [14:18] <DanC_lap> ok. I'm out of the office 9-noon chicago time, but somewhat reachable by cell phone
  108. # [14:18] <Philip> hsivonen: There's approximately a zillion different installers for Opera on Linux, so Opera doesn't seem to be averse to such things
  109. # [14:19] <Philip> e.g. http://snapshot.opera.com/unix/10.0-Alpha-1/intel-linux/ and that's just for x86
  110. # [14:19] <pimpbot> Title: Index of /unix/10.0-Alpha-1/intel-linux (at snapshot.opera.com)
  111. # [14:19] * DanC_lap thinks "approximately a zillion" is redundant; approximately a zillion = exactly a zillion
  112. # [14:19] <hsivonen> Philip: I thought Linux doesn't do installers. You just add an apt line somewhere. :-)
  113. # [14:19] <MikeSmith> DanC_lap: main thing I remember from the last telcon was a really long discussion about whether the term "platform feature" could be defined in such as way as include proprietary single-vendor plugins
  114. # [14:20] <Philip> DanC_lap: Not at all - a zillion plus one is approximately but not exactly a zillion
  115. # [14:20] <MikeSmith> DanC_lap: my suggestion for a solution to that was to not use the term "platform feature" at all, nor attempt to define it
  116. # [14:21] <Philip> hsivonen: Doesn't help much for pre-release builds that are never going to be in aot :-)
  117. # [14:21] * DanC_lap has no opinion
  118. # [14:21] <Philip> *apt
  119. # [14:22] <MikeSmith> hsivonen: btw, since I've not yet met my quota of suggesting at least one idea a day to you that you probably won't like: What do you think about the idea of not keeping the legacy.rnc file under source control at all (or in separate source-control elsewhere), but having it instead pulled in or generated by the build?
  120. # [14:22] <MikeSmith> hsivonen: I ask because I worry about people eventually re-packaging the whattf HTML5 schema with that file included
  121. # [14:23] <MikeSmith> (the include statement for it would then also need to added as part of the build)
  122. # [14:23] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: I'd rather autogenerate the 'driver' schemas that include the modules
  123. # [14:23] <MikeSmith> hmm, yeah
  124. # [14:23] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: I suppose legacy.rnc could be hidden in the validator svn repo or something
  125. # [14:23] <MikeSmith> yeah
  126. # [14:24] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: can't be much worse than how the SVG integration works now
  127. # [14:24] <MikeSmith> heh
  128. # [14:24] <MikeSmith> yeah, man
  129. # [14:24] <MikeSmith> you got some wild stuff going on there, with pulling stuff in from all kinds of places
  130. # [14:25] <hsivonen> which reminds me that I could try fixing the RDF bug shepazu found
  131. # [14:25] <MikeSmith> hsivonen: if you think it would be work considering, I can work on a patch for pulling in legacy.rnc and generating the drivers.
  132. # [14:25] <hsivonen> so I went through installing a weekly build of Opera 10 only to find that it still doesn't support .otf fonts :-( :-(
  133. # [14:26] * MikeSmith looks around for Håkon ...
  134. # [14:26] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: OK
  135. # [14:29] <MikeSmith> hsivonen: I guess generating the drivers is a good way to also help prevent people from considering the schema to be normative
  136. # [14:29] <hsivonen> I've considered making a service that generates the driver from query string params
  137. # [14:30] <MikeSmith> that'd definitely be a nice to have
  138. # [14:31] <hsivonen> shepazu: it seems I had already taken care of RDF in SVG metadata when SVG is embedded in XHTML...
  139. # [14:38] <Philip> hsivonen: Are you testing it with format("opentype") or whatever the syntax is? (I think Opera at some point in the past only recognised "truetype" in CSS, but would render the fonts regardless of their real type)
  140. # [14:38] * Quits: DanC_lap (connolly@128.30.52.30) (Quit: DanC_lap)
  141. # [14:39] <hsivonen> Philip: tested both with the much-promoted Opera 10 alpha
  142. # [14:39] <hsivonen> Philip: tested only format("opentype") with the weekly
  143. # [14:47] <Julian> anybody over here able to answer a semwebby question?
  144. # [14:47] <jgraham> Julian: That probably depends on the question
  145. # [14:48] <Julian> ok.
  146. # [14:48] <Julian> Q: is a RDF property identified by a URI or a IRI?
  147. # [14:49] <Julian> Q2: is there advice somewhere in a spec (citable) on how to choose good property names (with respect to the ability to express them as namspace+localname pair as well)?
  148. # [14:50] <hsivonen> Julian: my *guess* is that an RDF property is identified by a Unicode string
  149. # [14:50] <hsivonen> Julian: so that there's no IRI-to-URI conversion if you put an IRI in there
  150. # [14:50] <hsivonen> Julian: but this is just a guess from intuition
  151. # [14:51] <Julian> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#dfn-URI-reference
  152. # [14:51] <pimpbot> Title: Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax (at www.w3.org)
  153. # [14:51] <Julian> sounds like a LEIRI
  154. # [14:52] <Julian> "Note: this section anticipates an RFC on Internationalized Resource Identifiers. Implementations may issue warnings concerning the use of RDF URI References that do not conform with [IRI draft] or its successors."
  155. # [14:52] <Julian> so whitespace would be discouraged
  156. # [14:58] * Joins: matt_ (matt@128.30.52.30)
  157. # [14:59] * Quits: matt_ (matt@128.30.52.30) (Client exited)
  158. # [15:06] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Tomorrow to fresh woods, and pastures new.)
  159. # [15:08] * Joins: dsinger (dsinger@147.83.30.72)
  160. # [15:11] * Parts: dsinger (dsinger@147.83.30.72)
  161. # [15:15] * Quits: tlr (tlr@128.30.52.28) (Quit: tlr)
  162. # [15:15] * Joins: tlr (tlr@128.30.52.28)
  163. # [15:22] * Joins: DanC_lap (connolly@128.30.52.30)
  164. # [15:23] * Parts: anne (annevk@83.86.138.148)
  165. # [15:24] * Joins: anne (annevk@83.86.138.148)
  166. # [15:26] * Quits: DanC_lap (connolly@128.30.52.30) (Quit: DanC_lap)
  167. # [15:44] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  168. # [15:58] <pimpbot> planet: HTML5 and WAI-ARIA <http://annevankesteren.nl/2009/04/html5-wai-aria>
  169. # [16:18] * Quits: anne (annevk@83.86.138.148) (Client exited)
  170. # [16:18] * Joins: anne (annevk@83.86.138.148)
  171. # [16:22] <MikeSmith> so is there a list other than public-pfwg-comments where submitted comments area actually discussed?
  172. # [16:22] <MikeSmith> s/comments area/comments are/
  173. # [16:27] <jgraham> MikeSmith: There is a wai-xtech list but I'm not sure what is actually discussed there
  174. # [16:28] <jgraham> Like they might just ignore the comments then tell you later that you should have posted to pfwg-comments
  175. # [16:28] * Joins: billmason (bmason@69.30.57.191)
  176. # [16:29] <jgraham> As I may have mentioned before the whole idea of a write-only email address is insane
  177. # [16:29] <jgraham> s/address/list/
  178. # [16:29] <MikeSmith> jgraham: yeah, definitely suboptimal
  179. # [16:30] <MikeSmith> not everybody shares our views about value of openness and working completely in public
  180. # [16:31] <MikeSmith> maybe there's not any discussion at all anywhere going about the submitted comments yet
  181. # [16:31] <MikeSmith> some groups sort of do a comment-collection phase and then respond in batches
  182. # [16:32] <MikeSmith> I'm wondering if Aaron Leventhal is still involved with ARIA as an editor
  183. # [16:32] <jgraham> MikeSmith: I would be intrigued to hear a defence of the current pfwg setup
  184. # [16:34] <jgraham> Because even allowing for the fact that the group operates in secret, not allowing you to subscribe to the email list where you are commenting is bizzare in the extreme
  185. # [16:35] <MikeSmith> I thnk maybe it just wasn't well thought-through
  186. # [16:36] <jgraham> MikeSmith: Maybe you could enquire about the possibility of a renassiance?
  187. # [16:36] <MikeSmith> yeah, I will
  188. # [16:36] <anne> they log issues in a private issue tracker and then go through those during telcons
  189. # [16:36] <jgraham> MikeSmith: Great
  190. # [16:36] <anne> I was told
  191. # [16:36] <MikeSmith> MichaelC is here, so we can chat with him about it if/when he's free
  192. # [16:37] <anne> and then at some point they come back with an answer though hsivonen told me not all his comments from before the LC were addressed
  193. # [16:37] <anne> (which violates the Process document, but that's no surprise I suppose)
  194. # [16:38] <hsivonen> anne: yeah, I got a bit annoyed when I found that ARIA went to LC without either fixing the spec according my comments or responding with explicit rejection of my comments with rationale
  195. # [16:38] <hsivonen> anne: so I quoted a bit of the Process in one of my Last Call comments
  196. # [16:38] <MikeSmith> that is definitely an issue
  197. # [16:42] <MikeSmith> the Disposition of Comments document for every spec that transitions beyond LC is supposed to be a complete record, and the Director's decision is based on reviewing that document under the assumption that it is a complete and accurate record
  198. # [16:42] <anne> this were comments before going to LC
  199. # [16:42] <MikeSmith> ah
  200. # [16:42] <MikeSmith> so that's a different case
  201. # [16:43] <anne> still, per "Process" you go to LC having done your very best to address all the issues you know about
  202. # [16:43] <MikeSmith> yeah
  203. # [16:43] <anne> (and I believe it even calls for doing some outreach to get to know about more issues)
  204. # [16:43] <MikeSmith> there is a general expectation that groups make a good-faith effort to respond to all comments, regardless of what part of the process
  205. # [16:47] <MikeSmith> anyway, given the problem with public-pfwg-comments, it seems like you could choose to not submit comments there at all, but instead submit them over at wai-xtech
  206. # [16:48] <MikeSmith> I would think that the editors would all be subscribe to wai-xtech also
  207. # [16:48] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: then there'd be a risk of comments getting ignored due to wrong submission mechanism
  208. # [16:51] <MikeSmith> if messages are posted to wai-xtech, with subjects clearly labeled as "Last Call comment", it would be pretty hard for them to be ignored
  209. # [16:52] <MichaelC> I see I'm pinged. I don't want to be put in a position of responding defensively, which the tone of the above steers me to. I also have a meeting in a few so can't really get into it. A couple points of information:
  210. # [16:52] <MichaelC> The PF comments list is post-only because if comments come to a list where discussion also happens, it's nearly impossible to verify that we've satisfied our formal requirement of responding to all comments if they're mixed in with discussion. So we define comments as those arriving on the post-only list, and other discussions are helpful but not treated formally.
  211. # [16:52] <MichaelC> We do participate in discussions about the issues that have been submitted to us, included the XTech list, HTML list, and other fora. None of those discussions necessarily represent a group consensus on how to respond to the comment. Ensuring we have consensus on the response is one reason we hold off on sending responses.
  212. # [16:52] <MichaelC> The discussion of the public comments is happening in Member space in part because PF is structured as a Member group and that is the visibility our tracker happens to have. I have to say, though, that discussing more openly, when the discussion isn't complete and we don't have consensus, sometimes triggers a flood of reactions that we have to take time to deal with, when we didn't even have...
  213. # [16:52] <MichaelC> ...consensus on the position, so it really makes it difficult for us to fulfill our process requirements.
  214. # [16:52] <MichaelC> The comment stage does include a phase of requesting feedback from the commenter. We don't simply publish a new draft after rejecting suggestions received, without at least working with the commenter to see if we can arrive at a position.
  215. # [16:52] <MichaelC> We were not under formal requirements to respond to comments received before Last Call, so have not violated Process. However, we did make an attempt to make sure we addressed things. It is quite possible we dropped the ball on some, and I apologize.
  216. # [16:52] <MichaelC> Please don't send comments to wai-xtech without sending to public-pfwg-comments. They won't get processed as formal comments. Discussions on wai-xtech are helpful, and we'll try to be sure to reference them as we discuss the comments.
  217. # [16:52] <MichaelC> I have to go to a meeting now. I hope this is helpful information. I feel like you think we're acting in bad faith, and I believe we're working very hard to act in good faith. We have specific reasons for the way we do things, I hope you can understand that.
  218. # [16:53] <MikeSmith> nobody is saying you are acting in bad faith
  219. # [16:54] <anne> was that a copy & paste?
  220. # [16:54] <MichaelC> yes, but I wrote it just now, it wasn't a canned response if that's what you're asking
  221. # [16:55] <MikeSmith> MichaelC: the "tone of the above" (and comments elsewhere) seems to me to be a tone of genuine frustration, by people who want to comment on the spec and are finding that the current mechanism provided is making it hard for them do so in the way the can in other places
  222. # [16:55] <anne> MichaelC, ok
  223. # [16:56] * Quits: myakura (myakura@122.29.116.63) (Quit: Leaving...)
  224. # [16:57] <MikeSmith> MichaelC: many of the active HTML WG comments are coming from an culture of almost-completely-open dialog, and not accustomed to no-public discussions
  225. # [16:58] <MikeSmith> MichaelC: you all are of course free to use what commenting mechanisms work best for your needs
  226. # [16:59] <MikeSmith> but another risk here is that people end up being unhappy enough with the mechanism provided that they just don't bother to comment at all
  227. # [17:00] <MichaelC> I'm sorry, I am in a meeting now, I can't continue discussion right now. It does seem re last comment that this is a larger issue with concerns about W3C process. I feel caught in the middle on that. I really can't address it right now, and suggest we need Team discussion on this.
  228. # [17:00] * Joins: arun (arun@76.220.108.134)
  229. # [17:00] <MichaelC> FWIW I've been supporting many of the POVs expressed by HTML members in various fora
  230. # [17:00] <MichaelC> but also have various constraints to work in
  231. # [17:01] <anne> understood, it's not a personal thing fwiw
  232. # [17:01] <anne> at least, I hope it isn't!
  233. # [17:11] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  234. # [17:18] * Joins: aroben (aroben@71.58.77.15)
  235. # [17:37] * Joins: ChrisWilson (cwilso@131.107.0.74)
  236. # [17:47] <jgraham> MichaelC: I am basically in the category of people who is unhappy with the machanism to the extent that I am not motivated to comment
  237. # [17:48] <MichaelC> I'm sorry to hear that, it's certainly not the intent of the process. I will discuss this issue internally.
  238. # [17:49] * Joins: rubys1 (rubys@75.182.92.38)
  239. # [17:50] <jgraham> MichaelC: Thanks :)
  240. # [17:50] * rubys1 changes topic to 'HTML WG 16 Apr http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-wg-announce/2009AprJun/0005.html (This channel is logged: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ )'
  241. # [17:50] * Joins: Zakim (rrs-bridgg@128.30.52.30)
  242. # [17:50] <ChrisWilson> zakim, this will be html
  243. # [17:50] <Zakim> ok, ChrisWilson; I see HTML_WG()12:00PM scheduled to start in 13 minutes
  244. # [17:51] * rubys1 is now known as rubys
  245. # [17:52] * Parts: matt (matt@128.30.52.30)
  246. # [17:54] <anne> maybe add publication to the agenda? if any discussion is needed that is
  247. # [17:57] <Zakim> HTML_WG()12:00PM has now started
  248. # [17:57] * ChrisWilson is hunting down an empty conference room...
  249. # [17:57] <Zakim> + +49.251.280.aaaa
  250. # [17:57] <Julian> Zakim, +49.251.280.aaaa is me
  251. # [17:57] <Zakim> +Julian; got it
  252. # [17:59] <anne> Zakim, who is on the phone?
  253. # [17:59] <Zakim> On the phone I see Julian
  254. # [18:00] <Zakim> +Sam
  255. # [18:02] * ChrisWilson grr...now hunting an empty conference room with a functional speakerphone...
  256. # [18:02] * Julian doesn't need a conference room
  257. # [18:04] <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
  258. # [18:04] <ChrisWilson> zakim, microsoft is me
  259. # [18:04] <Zakim> +ChrisWilson; got it
  260. # [18:04] <ChrisWilson> zakim, who is on the phone?'
  261. # [18:04] <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on the phone?'', ChrisWilson
  262. # [18:04] <ChrisWilson> zakim, who is on the phone?
  263. # [18:04] <Zakim> On the phone I see Julian, Sam, ChrisWilson
  264. # [18:04] * anne has time if it's worthwhile
  265. # [18:05] * Julian thinks Anne should join
  266. # [18:05] <anne> Zakim, passcode?
  267. # [18:05] <Zakim> the conference code is 4865 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), anne
  268. # [18:05] <Zakim> +??P27
  269. # [18:06] <anne> Zakim, ??P27 is me
  270. # [18:06] <Zakim> +anne; got it
  271. # [18:06] <ChrisWilson> agenda+ publication
  272. # [18:06] * Zakim notes agendum 1 added
  273. # [18:06] <ChrisWilson> agenda+ review tracker
  274. # [18:06] * Zakim notes agendum 2 added
  275. # [18:08] <anne> scribe: anne
  276. # [18:08] * Julian sees his plan worked out
  277. # [18:08] <ChrisWilson> chair: ChrisWilson
  278. # [18:08] * ChrisWilson :)
  279. # [18:08] <ChrisWilson> zakim, take up agenda item 1
  280. # [18:08] <Zakim> 'item\ 1' does not match any agenda item, ChrisWilson
  281. # [18:08] <anne> Topic: Publication
  282. # [18:09] <ChrisWilson> zakim, take up item 1
  283. # [18:09] <Zakim> agendum 1. "publication" taken up [from ChrisWilson]
  284. # [18:09] <anne> CW: I presume you (AvK) wonder about publication status?
  285. # [18:10] <anne> AvK: I updated html5-diff. I wondered about the next set of steps.
  286. # [18:10] <anne> SR: As far as I'm concerned we're ready to go.
  287. # [18:10] <anne> CW: Ok, sounds like we should ask MS to publish it.
  288. # [18:10] <anne> SR: Yes
  289. # [18:11] <ChrisWilson> action MikeSmith push HTML diffs document and HTML5 out for another public draft
  290. # [18:11] * trackbot noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
  291. # [18:11] <trackbot> Created ACTION-119 - Push HTML diffs document and HTML5 out for another public draft [on Michael(tm) Smith - due 2009-04-23].
  292. # [18:11] <Zakim> +Cynthia_Shelly
  293. # [18:11] * anne Julian, heh
  294. # [18:11] * Joins: cshelly (4364de91@128.30.52.43)
  295. # [18:12] * Joins: RRSAgent (rrs-loggee@128.30.52.30)
  296. # [18:12] <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/04/16-html-wg-irc
  297. # [18:12] <ChrisWilson> zakim, close item 1
  298. # [18:12] <Zakim> agendum 1, publication, closed
  299. # [18:12] <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
  300. # [18:12] <Zakim> 2. review tracker [from ChrisWilson]
  301. # [18:12] <ChrisWilson> zakim, take up item 2
  302. # [18:12] <Zakim> agendum 2. "review tracker" taken up [from ChrisWilson]
  303. # [18:12] * anne wonders if the previous bits need to be typed in again...
  304. # [18:12] <MikeSmith> Zakim, call Mike-Mobile
  305. # [18:12] <Zakim> ok, MikeSmith; the call is being made
  306. # [18:12] <Zakim> +Mike
  307. # [18:12] <anne> RRSAgent, make logs public
  308. # [18:12] <RRSAgent> I have made the request, anne
  309. # [18:12] <ChrisWilson> tracker: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/agenda
  310. # [18:12] <pimpbot> Title: Input for Agenda Planning for the HTML Weekly - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
  311. # [18:13] * Joins: masinter (user@76.102.104.162)
  312. # [18:13] <MikeSmith> Zakim, who's on the phone?
  313. # [18:13] <Zakim> On the phone I see Julian, Sam, ChrisWilson, anne, Cynthia_Shelly, Mike
  314. # [18:13] <anne> scribe: anne
  315. # [18:13] <anne> chair: ChrisWilson
  316. # [18:13] <MikeSmith> trackbot, start meeting
  317. # [18:13] * trackbot is starting a teleconference
  318. # [18:13] <masinter> zakim, call masinter
  319. # [18:13] <Zakim> I am sorry, masinter; I do not know a number for masinter
  320. # [18:13] <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
  321. # [18:13] <RRSAgent> I have made the request, trackbot
  322. # [18:13] <trackbot> Zakim, this will be HTML
  323. # [18:13] <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see HTML_WG()12:00PM already started
  324. # [18:13] <trackbot> Meeting: HTML Weekly Teleconference
  325. # [18:13] <trackbot> Date: 16 April 2009
  326. # [18:13] <anne> Topic: Publication
  327. # [18:13] <anne> AvK: I was wondering about the status publication.
  328. # [18:13] <anne> RS: Now html5-diff is done I think we should ask MS.
  329. # [18:14] <anne> CW: Ok.
  330. # [18:14] <ChrisWilson> created an action-119 on mike to publish diffs and spec
  331. # [18:14] <Zakim> +Masinter
  332. # [18:14] <anne> MS: I think we can do it Tuesday
  333. # [18:14] <anne> CW: Great!
  334. # [18:15] <masinter> action-111?
  335. # [18:15] * trackbot getting information on ACTION-111
  336. # [18:15] <trackbot> ACTION-111 -- Sam Ruby to work on process issues re: summary -- due 2009-04-09 -- OPEN
  337. # [18:15] <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/111
  338. # [18:15] <ChrisWilson> reviewing tracker:
  339. # [18:15] <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-111 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
  340. # [18:15] <anne> Topic: Sam Ruby's actions
  341. # [18:15] <Julian> q+
  342. # [18:15] * Zakim sees Julian on the speaker queue
  343. # [18:16] <ChrisWilson> ack j
  344. # [18:16] * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
  345. # [18:16] <MikeSmith> agenda?
  346. # [18:16] * Zakim sees 1 item remaining on the agenda:
  347. # [18:16] * Zakim 2. review tracker [from ChrisWilson]
  348. # [18:16] <anne> SR: for ACTION-111 and ACTION-99 there was little interest on the topics so I plan on closing them
  349. # [18:16] <anne> JR: I'm interested in the profile attribute. What kind of input are you looking for?
  350. # [18:16] <ChrisWilson> s/closing them/closing them if there's no interest within three weeks
  351. # [18:17] <anne> SR: Robert Sayre was supposed to writing text for this and that is three months ago now.
  352. # [18:17] <MikeSmith> agenda+ public-pfwg-comments list / facilitating ARIA comment submission/discussion
  353. # [18:17] * Zakim notes agendum 3 added
  354. # [18:17] <masinter> action-99?
  355. # [18:17] * trackbot getting information on ACTION-99
  356. # [18:17] <trackbot> ACTION-99 -- Sam Ruby to review @profile -- due 2009-04-09 -- OPEN
  357. # [18:17] <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/99
  358. # [18:17] <anne> SR: Losing hope that this works out.
  359. # [18:17] <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-99 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
  360. # [18:17] <anne> JR: Can I write spec text?
  361. # [18:17] <anne> SR: Not sure if that's sufficient.
  362. # [18:17] <rubys> s/is three/is approaching three/
  363. # [18:17] <anne> SR: Though if there's hope we can get consensus on that, sure
  364. # [18:17] <anne> LM: The action items are very informative
  365. # [18:18] <anne> SR: There's extensive discussion on the mailing list
  366. # [18:18] <anne> LM: I guess those aren't linked
  367. # [18:18] <anne> SR: We're missing sufficient interest
  368. # [18:18] <anne> LM: I'm not sure it's clear to everyone that that's the critical path
  369. # [18:19] <anne> SR: I'll make it clear
  370. # [18:19] <anne> LM: That's great then
  371. # [18:19] <anne> CW: I'm fine with that; move on?
  372. # [18:19] <anne> SR: Ok
  373. # [18:19] <ChrisWilson> action-103?
  374. # [18:19] * trackbot getting information on ACTION-103
  375. # [18:19] <trackbot> ACTION-103 -- Lachlan Hunt to register about: URI scheme -- due 2009-04-09 -- OPEN
  376. # [18:19] <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/103
  377. # [18:19] <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-103 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
  378. # [18:19] <Julian> q+
  379. # [18:19] * Zakim sees Julian on the speaker queue
  380. # [18:19] <masinter> there's lots of interest in the features, need to be clear to the people that are interested in the feature that this is the criticla path
  381. # [18:19] <ChrisWilson> ack j
  382. # [18:19] * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
  383. # [18:19] <masinter> julian: there has not been a new draft submitted yet
  384. # [18:19] <anne> Topic: about URL scheme
  385. # [18:19] <anne> JR: no draft has been submitted
  386. # [18:20] <anne> CW: I believe LH was travelling and just got back
  387. # [18:20] <anne> CW: I'll ping him
  388. # [18:20] <Julian> s/no draft/no new draft/
  389. # [18:20] * anne thinks he was travelling too
  390. # [18:20] * anne ... easter and all
  391. # [18:20] * Julian thought it was Joseph H. who would do it
  392. # [18:20] <masinter> action-105?
  393. # [18:20] * trackbot getting information on ACTION-105
  394. # [18:20] <trackbot> ACTION-105 -- Sam Ruby to should arrange a meeting between chairs of HTML WG and XHTML2 WG to ensure there is a plan for coordination of vocabularies to avoid incompatibilities. -- due 2009-04-09 -- OPEN
  395. # [18:20] <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/105
  396. # [18:20] <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-105 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
  397. # [18:20] <anne> Julian, they coordinate
  398. # [18:21] <anne> Topic: XHTML2 + HTML
  399. # [18:21] * Julian ack
  400. # [18:21] <anne> SR: I think the ball is in the court of Steven Pemberton and co
  401. # [18:21] <anne> SR: So I'm pushing this back a couple of weeks
  402. # [18:21] * Quits: cshelly (4364de91@128.30.52.43) (Quit: CGI:IRC (Ping timeout))
  403. # [18:21] <masinter> again, emails discussing this action are not linked from action, is this a tracker problem?
  404. # [18:21] <anne> CW: Ok
  405. # [18:21] <ChrisWilson> action-108
  406. # [18:21] * RRSAgent sees no action items
  407. # [18:21] <ChrisWilson> action-108?
  408. # [18:21] * trackbot getting information on ACTION-108
  409. # [18:21] <trackbot> ACTION-108 -- Larry Masinter to report back on the TAG's work on versioning wrt HTML -- due 2009-04-16 -- OPEN
  410. # [18:21] <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/108
  411. # [18:21] <anne> masinter, are there emails?
  412. # [18:21] <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-108 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
  413. # [18:21] <anne> Topic: TAG work on versioning
  414. # [18:22] <anne> LM: topic scheduled for the next meeting
  415. # [18:22] <ChrisWilson> action-105 +1week
  416. # [18:22] <anne> LM: any thoughts on what the TAG could do that would be useful?
  417. # [18:23] <anne> LM: the current draft from the TAG regarding a general framework might not always apply cleanly to HTML
  418. # [18:23] <anne> CW: I would like to understand what the TAG thinks, what they'd recommend
  419. # [18:23] <anne> CW: for versioning in HTML
  420. # [18:23] <anne> LM: specifically?
  421. # [18:23] <anne> CW: Right now I feel like there's a lot of discussion regarding versioning and patterns around versioning
  422. # [18:24] <anne> CW: there's probably a feeling that the patterns don't necessarily apply to HTML
  423. # [18:24] <masinter> This is the topic for the next TAG call today
  424. # [18:24] <anne> CW: wanting to have one HTML; those two things are in conflict
  425. # [18:24] <anne> CW: I believe that versioning is a really good thing in any language
  426. # [18:24] <anne> CW: that's not a general consensus here, certainly
  427. # [18:24] <anne> LM: what qualities of versioning do you think is missing?
  428. # [18:24] <anne> LM: what is that you don't have that you want?
  429. # [18:25] <anne> LM: need more elaboration of the problem
  430. # [18:25] <anne> CW: I want it to be clear that when I answer that question the "you" is Chris Wilson and not the HTML WG
  431. # [18:26] <anne> CW: the general problem with how we define HTML today; if HTML5 becomes a Rec and we realize we did something poorly we will cause rampant compatibility problems if we change implementations
  432. # [18:26] <anne> CW: there are a whole bunch of versioning mechanism that will address that but also cause their own problems
  433. # [18:27] <anne> CW: e.g. create a whole new element or feature
  434. # [18:27] <masinter> I think the general idea of 'versioning' is that you include some indicator of version in the current language that will allow current processors to deal appropriately with future languages and recognize that they don't understand or can process appropriately this future content. The main thing is to categorize or predict the kinds of future content that current implementations should avoid or react to in some appropriate way. What are
  435. # [18:27] <masinter> those categories?
  436. # [18:27] <anne> CW: or specify very specific versions e.g. 5.0.3
  437. # [18:27] <anne> CW: somewhere in between would work
  438. # [18:28] <ChrisWilson> ^ "somewhere in that spectrum will be our solution"
  439. # [18:28] <anne> sorry
  440. # [18:28] <anne> s/somewhere in between would work/somewhere in that spectrum will be our solution/
  441. # [18:28] * ChrisWilson no need - you're doing a great job at capturing
  442. # [18:28] <anne> LM: The difficult thing is figuring out what changes we want to allow for.
  443. # [18:29] * ChrisWilson I was trying to say "it may be that we don't have any version at all" - which is in the spectrum, at one end. :)
  444. # [18:29] <anne> LM: E.g. we indicate the current version in the document and current and future implementations will react differently to that somehow
  445. # [18:29] <masinter> giving you a flavor of the general approach, and hoping to use HTML versioning as a good example
  446. # [18:29] <anne> CW: Having the TAG consider the whole spectrum of strategies and providing feedback on what would be best would be good
  447. # [18:30] <anne> LM: What's versioning anyway? Provide a indicator of the version in the document and future implementations will react to that in a certain way.
  448. # [18:31] <anne> LM: Some extensions might require plug-ins, some might not require browser implementations at all.
  449. # [18:31] <anne> CW: I'm happy to listen to other people
  450. # [18:31] <masinter> Using Raman's deconstruction of features as "platform features" vs "language features"
  451. # [18:31] <anne> CW: I think the idea of not having a version is the idea that HTML is lasting platform
  452. # [18:32] <masinter> Version indicators in HTML have included DOCTYPE, namespaces, adding new elements, attributes, new APIs, Javascript indicators of versions, MIME types, ....
  453. # [18:32] <anne> CW: The idea of writing HTML in 2035 and having it still be usable in implementations of 2020
  454. # [18:32] <anne> CW: I don't think that will work
  455. # [18:32] <masinter> are there more kind of 'version indicators' or things that current processors can recognize?
  456. # [18:33] <anne> CW: I meant that the other way around
  457. # [18:33] <masinter> content written at time X should be usable in browsers built at X+Y, and also the converse
  458. # [18:33] <anne> CW: I.e. writing content in 2020 still being usable in 2035 without having to implement lots of versions of HTML
  459. # [18:33] <anne> CW: I think that's the goal of some people however I'm sceptical that it's going to work
  460. # [18:34] <anne> CW: However large and smart the group is I don't think they can foresee all implications
  461. # [18:34] <jgraham> Content written in 1995 still works in 2009
  462. # [18:34] <anne> LM: [...] that older readers can still read from newer writers in some way
  463. # [18:35] <anne> LM: i.e. current readers deal with future content; that's hard
  464. # [18:35] <anne> LM: the other way, future readers can read current content
  465. # [18:35] <anne> AvK: why is that needed? content from 95 still works in 2009?
  466. # [18:35] * Joins: cshelly (43a15346@128.30.52.43)
  467. # [18:36] <anne> LM: that's because you have doctype switching
  468. # [18:36] <anne> AvK: ok, that's from 99, since then we haven't done anything like that
  469. # [18:37] <anne> AvK: I would find it interesting if the TAG looked at this from a historical perspective rather than a framework perspective. E.g. look at CSS and HTML in more detail
  470. # [18:38] <anne> CW: in 2005 we were still able to play with doctype switching
  471. # [18:38] <masinter> standards mode vs. quirks mode history is really useful
  472. # [18:38] <anne> CW: in 2006 we switched things and got more issues
  473. # [18:39] <masinter> is this written up somewhere? this is really useful
  474. # [18:39] <anne> CW: we get the same ability to switch things based on HTML5 nodes
  475. # [18:39] <anne> masinter, http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ has info on DOCTYPE switching
  476. # [18:39] <pimpbot> Title: Activating Browser Modes with Doctype (at hsivonen.iki.fi)
  477. # [18:40] <anne> AvK: fyi: IE is quite different from all other browsers here. In other browsers quirks mode is just a fixed amount of differences
  478. # [18:40] <ChrisWilson> agreed: IE has a higher bar for compatibility version-over-version than other browsers.
  479. # [18:40] <masinter> thanks, this is very helpful
  480. # [18:41] <anne> CW: do you feel you have enough to go on?
  481. # [18:41] <anne> LM: we have an agenda but I wanted to explicitly ask this group
  482. # [18:41] <anne> LM: it's important that the TAG does things that are useful for the W3C WGs; not sure that's always been the history
  483. # [18:41] <anne> SR: do we have a new date?
  484. # [18:41] * Joins: dsinger (dsinger@147.83.129.157)
  485. # [18:41] <anne> CW: I assume next week
  486. # [18:41] <anne> LM: I can report next week
  487. # [18:42] <anne> CW: ok
  488. # [18:42] <anne> LM: I see this as an ongoing conversation
  489. # [18:42] * Joins: DanC_lap (connolly@128.30.52.30)
  490. # [18:43] <ChrisWilson> action-114?
  491. # [18:43] * trackbot getting information on ACTION-114
  492. # [18:43] <trackbot> ACTION-114 -- Cynthia Shelly to report progress on ARIA TF -- due 2009-04-16 -- OPEN
  493. # [18:43] <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/114
  494. # [18:43] <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-114 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
  495. # [18:43] <anne> Topic: ARIA TF
  496. # [18:43] <anne> CS: Meeting two weeks; next one tomorrow; making slow progress. People are making progress on the various action items.
  497. # [18:43] <anne> CS: Waiting for someone from Opera and Apple. Pretty sure about Opera, less confident about Apple.
  498. # [18:44] <anne> CS: Maybe push this report of three weeks so I can report after the meeting?
  499. # [18:44] <anne> CW: ok
  500. # [18:44] <ChrisWilson> action-115
  501. # [18:44] * RRSAgent sees no action items
  502. # [18:44] <ChrisWilson> action-115?
  503. # [18:44] * trackbot getting information on ACTION-115
  504. # [18:44] <trackbot> ACTION-115 -- Michael(tm) Smith to set up WBS for HTML WG participants to @@ reTPAC 2009 -- due 2009-04-16 -- OPEN
  505. # [18:44] <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/115
  506. # [18:44] <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-115 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
  507. # [18:44] <anne> Topic: TPAC 2009 WBS form
  508. # [18:44] <anne> MS: still not done
  509. # [18:45] <anne> AvK: wasn't there a deadline?
  510. # [18:45] <MikeSmith> action-115 due tomorrow
  511. # [18:45] * trackbot attempting to change due date on ACTION-115.
  512. # [18:45] <trackbot> ACTION-115 Set up WBS for HTML WG participants to @@ reTPAC 2009 due date now tomorrow
  513. # [18:45] <anne> MS: internal use
  514. # [18:45] <anne> CW: I replied weeks ago that we did want to have a meeting
  515. # [18:45] <anne> CW: was enough interest on the telcon back then
  516. # [18:45] <anne> CW: so we met that deadline
  517. # [18:46] * anne has to go so that's great!
  518. # [18:46] <ChrisWilson> any other items?
  519. # [18:46] <anne> RRSAgent, draft minutes
  520. # [18:46] <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/04/16-html-wg-minutes.html anne
  521. # [18:46] <Zakim> -anne
  522. # [18:47] <MikeSmith> Zakim, take up agendum 3
  523. # [18:47] <Zakim> agendum 3. "public-pfwg-comments list / facilitating ARIA comment submission/discussion" taken up [from MikeSmith]
  524. # [18:47] <ChrisWilson> zakim, close agendum 2
  525. # [18:47] <Zakim> agendum 2, review tracker, closed
  526. # [18:47] <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
  527. # [18:47] <Zakim> 3. public-pfwg-comments list / facilitating ARIA comment submission/discussion [from MikeSmith]
  528. # [18:56] * Joins: adele (adele@17.246.18.119)
  529. # [18:59] <MikeSmith> action: Michael(tm) to talk with Michael Cooper and PFWG about possibility of better facilitating comments on ARIA spec
  530. # [18:59] * trackbot noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
  531. # [18:59] * RRSAgent records action 1
  532. # [18:59] <trackbot> Created ACTION-120 - Talk with Michael Cooper and PFWG about possibility of better facilitating comments on ARIA spec [on Michael(tm) Smith - due 2009-04-23].
  533. # [18:59] <Zakim> -Mike
  534. # [18:59] <Zakim> -Cynthia_Shelly
  535. # [18:59] <Zakim> -Julian
  536. # [18:59] <Zakim> -ChrisWilson
  537. # [18:59] <Zakim> -Sam
  538. # [18:59] <Zakim> -Masinter
  539. # [18:59] <Zakim> HTML_WG()12:00PM has ended
  540. # [19:00] <Zakim> Attendees were Julian, Sam, ChrisWilson, anne, Cynthia_Shelly, Mike, Masinter
  541. # [19:00] <ChrisWilson> rrsagent, make minutes
  542. # [19:00] <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/04/16-html-wg-minutes.html ChrisWilson
  543. # [19:00] <pimpbot> Title: HTML Weekly Teleconference -- 16 Apr 2009 (at www.w3.org)
  544. # [19:05] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.207.11)
  545. # [19:17] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  546. # [19:21] * Quits: cshelly (43a15346@128.30.52.43) (Quit: CGI:IRC (Ping timeout))
  547. # [19:24] * Parts: anne (annevk@83.86.138.148)
  548. # [19:24] * Quits: ChrisWilson (cwilso@131.107.0.74) (Ping timeout)
  549. # [19:28] * Joins: anne (annevk@83.86.138.148)
  550. # [19:41] * tlr is now known as tlr-bbl
  551. # [20:00] * Joins: ChrisWilson (cwilso@131.107.0.80)
  552. # [20:05] * Parts: rubys (rubys@75.182.92.38)
  553. # [20:07] * Parts: asbjornu (asbjorn@84.48.116.244)
  554. # [20:08] * Quits: ChrisWilson (cwilso@131.107.0.80) (Ping timeout)
  555. # [20:14] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  556. # [20:22] * Joins: ChrisWilson (cwilso@131.107.0.104)
  557. # [20:22] * Quits: ChrisWilson (cwilso@131.107.0.104) (Quit: ChrisWilson)
  558. # [20:25] * Joins: dbaron (dbaron@63.245.220.241)
  559. # [20:37] * Quits: tlr-bbl (tlr@128.30.52.28) (Quit: tlr-bbl)
  560. # [20:49] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  561. # [20:51] * Quits: MichaelC (Michael@128.30.52.30) (Ping timeout)
  562. # [20:54] * Quits: heycam (cam@210.84.43.19) (Ping timeout)
  563. # [20:55] * Joins: heycam (cam@210.84.43.19)
  564. # [21:02] * Joins: MichaelC (Michael@128.30.52.30)
  565. # [21:13] * Joins: asbjornu (asbjorn@84.48.116.244)
  566. # [21:33] * Joins: tlr (tlr@128.30.52.28)
  567. # [21:49] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Ping timeout)
  568. # [21:52] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  569. # [22:25] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  570. # [22:55] * Quits: heycam (cam@210.84.43.19) (Ping timeout)
  571. # [22:59] * Joins: heycam (cam@210.84.43.19)
  572. # [23:05] * Quits: gavin (gavin@63.245.208.169) (Ping timeout)
  573. # [23:15] * Quits: ROBOd (robod@89.122.216.38) (Quit: http://www.robodesign.ro )
  574. # [23:17] * Joins: gavin (gavin@63.245.208.169)
  575. # [23:45] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
  576. # Session Close: Fri Apr 17 00:00:00 2009

The end :)