.TAG
See also:IRC log
<scribe> Scribe: DanC
Next teleconference: propose 15 November
<Norm> Norm: regrets for 15 November
<noah> I will chair next week.
regrets 15 Nov: Norm, Vincent; Ed; at risk: Tim, Dan
RESOLUTION: to cancel 15 Nov andmeet next 22 Nov, VQ to chair
agenda comments?
DanC: some auth stuff... and norm's ns8stuff
endpointrefs stuff postponed pending DO, HT'savailability
NM: without henry, endpointRefs might betricky
<DanC_>minutes 1 Nov
RESOLVED to accept
RESOLUTION: to confirm 12-14 June2006 in Western MA meeting plans
<DanC_>Dec. F2FAgenda Items [NM to www-tag]
NM summarizes msg of Tue, 8 Nov 2005 12:27:32 -0500
<Ed> * Followup to Edinburgh discussions ofversioning: we seemed to be off to a useful if somewhat slow start insettling terminology, etc., and I think there was some sense thatversioning-related work could be a key theme for the TAG's work in the comingyear or two.
<Ed> (from Noah's email)
<Ed> * Self-describing documents: I don'tthink we have an issue around this, but Tim at least informally seemed tofeel it would be worth attention. I agree, and I might be convinced to dosome work on a finding (though we'll have to set priorities relative to TAGcommitments already made).
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note progresson versioning
<Ed> * schemeProtocols-49: I owe the TAG areworked position to be available within the next few weeks, allowing timefor TAG members to read and consider before the F2F. I think a couple ofhours on this would be worthwhile. The goal would be either to finally agreethat there's something worth pursuing, or to formally put it aside for theforseeable future.
DanC: Self-describing documents .. umm...yeah... worth some time... not sure how.
... on schemeProtocols-49 ... I should get in touch with some of theproponents of http: synonyms...
NM: mms: is relevant there too
<Ed> * Web Services and the Web: I thinkwe're using endPointRefs-47 as an excuse for the TAG to come up to speed onWeb Services and perhaps to discover new issues worth pursuing. Henry'sworked example seems useful.
NM: perhaps "principle of least power" meritssome time at the ftf too.
Ed: perhaps focus more on this bit of ourcharter: "when setting future directions, help establish criteria forstarting new work at W3C, and help W3C coordinate its work with that of otherorganizations."
DanC: how would that be different from whatwe're doing now?
Ed: e.g. mobile web... perhaps put togethersomething on content/presentation before mobile web inititative publishessomething
DanC: I can see both sides of that, but I'mconcerned about whether we're doing what we say we're going to do... longlist of actions with slow progress... which things to preempt?
NM: it occurs to me that there will [may] besome turn-over... we could think about what we're going to hand to theincoming folks
... "issue list and assignments"?
Ed: anything else? well, that's it for now; wecan add more later
... priorities?
DanC: prioritize stuff based on work that getsdone before the meeting
Ed: hmm...
NM: agenda seems fluid enough to let incomingwriting influence it
<DanC_>Associating Resources withNamespaces 7 November 2005
NDW: pls excuse encoding noise... working on.htaccess
... am I on the right track?
DanC: it's not so much "instead of" RDDL...we're also endorsing RDDL as is, right?
NDW: right.
<noah> Noah thinks that Norm's "We hope to:1)... 2)... 3)..." is balanced on the status of RDDL.
DanC: I'm not in a good position to review...I'll just see what I want to see
Ed: I'm OK to review it.
<scribe>ACTION: NDW tofill in section 5 ofhttp://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/nsDocuments/[recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2005/11/08-tagmem-irc]
<scribe>ACTION: Ed toreviewhttp://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/nsDocuments/after NDW updates w.r.t section 5, perhaps by 22 Nov [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2005/11/08-tagmem-irc]
<Norm> Funny characters fixed
DanC: status... hmm... it's in the shape of afinding... we've been asked for a REC... a finding is OK by me, at least fornow
NDW: let's shop it around as a finding fornow
<DanC_>Web Auth: state of theart, some notes
<noah> If you mean Microsoft Infocard, Noahis surprised that it is purely WS-Trust based. I thought it was a generalrepository and associated "non scary to ordinary mortals" UI for allcredentials.
[missed lots by danc]
NDW: that was SAML
NM: I got the impression InfoCard was morefederated than just ws-trust
... sorta like web browsers mostly use http, though they can use other urischemes
DC: I got the impression ws-trust played thepivotal role
... I hear a workshop might be in progress
<noah> FWIW: the Microsoft Web Page aboutInfocard appears to be at:http://msdn.microsoft.com/windowsvista/building/infocard/default.aspx
Ed: perhaps we should recommend that W3C do aworkshop?
... on web authentication
<Roy> *shrug*
<noah> Following up on scope of Infocard,see specifically:http://msdn.microsoft.com/windowsvista/building/infocard/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnwebsrv/html/identitymetasystem.asp#identitymetasy_topic9
DanC: I'm conflicted... I'm not sure I'll beable to go. If I could go, I'd like it to happen.
<scribe>ACTION: DanC towrite a report on the state of the art authentication in the web[CONTINUES] [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2005/11/08-tagmem-irc]
violet
<Norm> ty
<Norm> FYI:http://www.horstmann.com/violet/
<Zakim> noah, you wanted to say we're notin 100% total agreement on the use of the term "language"
I think stringset is what we got inhttp://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/09/22-diagram1.png
<Ed> noah: I think we should set downinstructions on how we should read that diagram we had on the white board
<Norm> brb
DC: tx for feedback... this week and next arekinda shot, but the following week might work
meanwhile... ACTION DaveO to update finding with ext/vers
DC: I guess my target is to tell this "HTML 2sublanguage of HTML4" story
DO: ok, let's hope that folds into thefinding
<scribe>ACTION: DanC toderive RDF/RDFS/OWL version of terminology from whiteboard[CONTINUES] [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2005/11/08-tagmem-irc]
<scribe>ACTION: DaveO toupdate finding with ext/vers[CONTINUES] [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2005/11/08-tagmem-irc]
<Ed>TAGactions
NM: I see my CDF review action marked done.
RF: made a little progress on mime/respectitem. ()
<scribe>ACTION: RF toupdate Authoritative Metadata finding to include resolution ofputMediaType-38[CONTINUES] [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2005/11/08-tagmem-irc]
ADJOURN.
