- From: John Bradley <john.bradley@wingaa.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 09:28:34 -0700
- To: "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>
- Cc: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <A21F20F7-4DD0-4A5A-8DDA-1339048C4F0C@wingaa.com>
I just want to clarify that when David boot and I refer to URI prefix
we are defiantly not talking about the DNS sub-domain as indicated in
the minutes.
A URI prefix must follow the chain of authority.
http://xri.*/* is not following the DNS chain of authority and
though used as an example in the current XRI spec, it is not part of
the proposal.
The booth+bradley proposal requires URI prefixes in the form:
http://*.xri/* (if registering a new TLD)
http://*.xri.net/* (if using the existing proxy domain)
http://thing-described-by.org (if using David's thing described by
sub-scheme)
I agree that the examples
> [14] http://xri.*/*
> [15] http://*/ark:*
Are not ideal and at least on the the XRI side we have moved beyond
that.
Some discussion we have had regarding a way of doing "Dynamic booth
+bradley" may work well with the existing ARK syntax.
That however is a separate topic.
Regards
John Bradley
On 16-Sep-08, at 8:34 AM, Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) wrote:
>
> Draft minutes from our meeting of 11th September 2008 are available
> in plain text below and at:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/11-minutes
>
> My thanks to our scribe.
>
> Best regards
>
> Stuart Williams
> --
> Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell,
> Berks RG12 1HN
> Registered No: 690597 England
> =
> =
> =
> =
> =
> =
> =
> =
> =
> ======================================================================
>
>
> [1]W3C
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/
>
> - DRAFT -
>
> TAG Weekly Telcon
>
> 11 Sep 2008
>
> [2]Agenda
>
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/11-agenda
>
> See also: [3]IRC log
>
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-tagmem-irc
>
> Attendees
>
> Present
> Stuart_Williams, Jonathan_Rees, T.V._Raman, Henry_Thompson,
> Ashok_Malhotra, Dan_Connolly, Dave_Orchard, Noah_Mendelsohn
>
> Regrets
> Noah, Norm, DaveO(partial)
>
> Chair
> Stuart Williams
>
> Scribe
> Ashok Malhotra
>
> Contents
>
> * [4]Topics
> 1. [5]Convene
> 2. [6]binaryXML-30 (ISSUE-30)
> 3. [7]UrnsAndRegistries-50 (ISSUE-50)
> 4. [8]Self-Describing Web
> 5. [9]F2F Agenda
> 6. [10]abbreviatedURI-56 (ISSUE-56)
> * [11]Summary of Action Items
> _________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> <skw> Scribe: Ashok Malhotra
>
> Convene
>
> <scribe> scribenick: Ashok
>
> No comments on agenda
>
> Resolution: Minutes from Sep 4 approved
> [12]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-tagmem-minutes
>
> [12] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-tagmem-minutes
>
> Next week call a risk. Regets from Tim. Stuart may not be able to
> make it
>
> HT: Use the time to read our documents
>
> Cancel next week's meeting
>
> <jar> +1 use the time to read
>
> Next meeting f2f
>
> Raman: If we are serious abt this, all TAG members should read the
> HTML spec
>
> DanC: Please let's finish reading list and Agenda for f2f
>
> binaryXML-30 (ISSUE-30)
>
> <Zakim> ht, you wanted to acknowledge my EXI actions
>
> HT: I will read these on the 'plane and make a recommendation on
> what we should do
>
> DanC: Last, we said tell us how you are better than gzip
>
> HT: That's where we are, the ball is bak in our court.
>
> SKW: We will discuss this again at our FTF.
>
> UrnsAndRegistries-50 (ISSUE-50)
>
> <DanC> (though Dec sounds wierd... I thought our request was since
> Dec)
>
> HT: I'm working on a new document. Shd have it ready middle on next
> week
>
> <DanC> close action-167
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-167 S to start a thread on non-DNS authority
> resolution on www-tag closed
>
> DanC: What's happening with XRIs?
>
> SKW: Summarizes situation
>
> We have not had a formal proposal saying would you be happy with ...
>
> SKW: We had a discussion on how the discussion was going
>
> <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to check whether skw meant it when he said
> "prefix", since DNS names go least-significant-first
>
> <DanC> does either booth or bradly advocate an actual prefix?
>
> <Zakim> ht, you wanted to say there's one thing we will need to
> chase no matter what
>
> <ht> Abstract Identifier document:
> [13]http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/AbstractIdentifierArchitecture
>
> [13] http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/AbstractIdentifierArchitecture
>
> SKW: That's not the proposal
>
> <jar> (Out of order) saying "[14]http://xri.*/*" are XRIS is same as
> saying "[15]http://*/ark:*" are ARKs ...
>
> [14] http://xri.*/*
> [15] http://*/ark:*
>
> <ht> And I think there is _some_ room to argue that both of these
> are OK, if not ideal
>
> Self-Describing Web
>
> Noah has incorporated feedback from Norm and SKW:
>
> SKW: Norm and I would be supportive of publication
>
> <Zakim> ht, you wanted to ask a question
>
> ht: In a discussion with a student I realized ...
>
> <ht> I believe the following: "FYN works iff every party to the
> story is a) publically accountable
>
> <ht> and b) aware of the dependency of the FYN story on their part
> of it.
>
> <ht> "
>
> <DanC> I think you can follow-your-nose into policies and such that
> aren't world-readable
>
> DanC: I would not say 'publically accounatable"
>
> HT: The parties have to be publically accountable
>
> SKW: The draft does not say this
>
> HT: I would like to discuss this
>
> SKW: Pl. send comment
>
> DanC: I disagree for 3 reasons
>
> <DanC> (I ran out after 2)
>
> <DanC> (1) need not be world-readable
>
> <DanC> (2) the URI for text/plain isn't actually critical path
>
> <DanC> ... currently
>
> <DanC> (though it's nice that the text/plain full URI is in an RFC)
>
> HT: I will send mail on this
>
> <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to think about whether RDFa is critical
> path: if we leave it aside, what's the audience/purpose? and to
>
> DanC: How can we finish without RDFa story?
> ... I'm not sure story holds up
>
> SKW: can we document missing link and encourage them to put it in
> place.
>
> <skw> [16]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/f2fkc-agenda
>
> [16] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/f2fkc-agenda
>
> F2F Agenda
>
> SKW: Talks about the f2f agenda. Thanks Raman for his help
>
> DanC: I would like to negotiate the reading list now
>
> <DanC> I hear from skw: urnsregs, binaryxml, html*,
>
> <DanC> digest of ?
>
> SKW: Should read binary XML specs, HTML spec, collected digest of
> refernces from Raman's thread
>
> <DanC> self-describing web draft
>
> <DanC> passwords in the clear
>
> Self-describing Web, Password in Clear, Versioning
>
> <DanC> versioning revision from david
>
> Need two readers for Binary XML, HT is one.
>
> URNsAndRegistries-50 ... HT writing paper. Due Tuesday. Shd be read
> by f2f
>
> <DanC> * tim's bit
>
> HT: We should all have read Tim's paper
>
> <skw> also had an explicit request from David for Jar's formal
> treatment...
>
> <ht> s/alll/all/
>
> <DanC> "the document"... one document on versioning?
>
> <DanC> DO nominates JAR's formalism
>
> DaveO: What is new is Jonathan's formalism. Recommend people read
> this by f2f
>
> <DanC> DO: key chapter is ch5
>
> DaveO: Please review Chapter 5. That is new and is key
>
> <DanC> HT nominates SVG and HTML thread from public-html... a dozen
> messages
>
> HT: Read SVG and HTML thread. Read 10 msgs and get a feeling of the
> context
>
> <DanC> TVR 2nds... long thread... read for motivations
>
> <DanC> (looks like TVR's agenda input subsumes HT's suggestion to
> read a thread)
>
> TVR: Read HTML spec with a view thru the structuring lens I proposed
>
> JR: Is there a document that tells why W3C got involved in html5
>
> <noah> Are you discussing reading list?
>
> <jar>
> [17]http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/AbstractIdentifierArchitecture
>
> [17] http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/AbstractIdentifierArchitecture
>
> <jar> ?
>
> DanC: I can point to formal mataerial but that's not what you want
>
> <DanC> on mime types... a section of the html spec
>
> <DanC> pwinc fri
>
> <noah> Friday's OK if short, I think.
>
> <DanC> (thanks; I was just gonna ask for irc convirmation)
>
> Noah: Are we all supposed to read whole HTML spec?
>
> <DanC> nm nominates thread on meeting goals
>
> Noah: Please read thread on Tag Soup
>
> HT: Norm is not coming to Kansas City
>
> <skw> I think that the thread Noah referred to is based at:
> [18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2008Aug/0019.html
>
> [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2008Aug/0019.html
>
> DanC: I will send mail before EOD after editing agenda page
>
> Possible topic GenricResources-53
>
> Content negotiation and Abstract Documents
>
> Not on agenda currently. You can lobby me.
>
> TVR: Steve said he was pulling in my TPAC proposal
>
> abbreviatedURI-56 (ISSUE-56)
>
> SKW: Asks abt status of CURIE comments
>
> <DanC> (anybody have a summary of the comment? the subject line was
> a generic "comments on X")
>
> Noah: That's for responder to say
>
> SKW: Summarizez comments
>
> Editorial: Qnames never inted as attribute values. Some discussion
> on this
>
> <DanC> (pls promote that "main substantive comment" to the subject
> line)
>
> SKW: Definition of XML Schema datatype
>
> <ht> Please remember that we have already fed back on this point,
> see
> [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar/0
> 014.html
>
> [19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar/0014.html
>
> <skw> ?
>
> AM: Noah you had a comment on lack of clarity between CURIE and URI
> where there is ambiguity
>
> Noah: I sent this as a personal comment. If no objection, I can add
> to my note
>
> <jar> the whole point of safecurie was so that they can be put in
> uri contexts
>
> <DanC> yes, now that I understand the comment, it seems to miss the
> point of safecuries
>
> <noah> Well, it hijacks the use of [ in everyone's languages.
>
> Raman: I'm uncomfotable with this. We need to allow new syntax in
> old contexts
>
> jar: If there was no intention of extensing URI content there would
> be no SafeCURIEs
>
> <jar> RDFa already would violate a prohibition on safecuries. It's
> too late to prohibit safecuries
>
> HT: We should be careful abt distinguishing between CURIE's and
> SafeCURIES
>
> <DanC> <ht> Please remember that we have already fed back on this
> point, see
> [20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar/0
> 014.html
>
> [20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar/0014.html
>
> HT: We should not go back on that advice
>
> TVR: The way Noah phrased it it sets a very high bar for new syntax
>
> <jar> Two questions here! (1) CURIEs in URI contexts? (No.) (2)
> SafeCURIEs in URI contexts? (RDFa requires.)
>
> <Zakim> noah, you wanted to say implying safecuries can be used in
> existing languages where URIs are expected hijacks the use of [ in
> those languages.
>
> Noah: Explains his POV ... I should open my spec to other syntax
>
> <jar> relative URIs can start with [, yes?
>
> They should make clear that these things are not URis
>
> DaveO: Supports Noah. CURIEs cannot be wedged into existing
> specifiactions
>
> <jar> I repeat: There are two questions here! (1) CURIEs in URI
> contexts? (No.) (2) SafeCURIEs in URI contexts? (RDFa requires.)
>
> <DanC> jar, does RDFa use <a href="[safecuri]">? I see deployment
> problems there.
>
> <skw> [21]http://www.w3.org/mid/48B810F4.60807@aptest.com
>
> [21] http://www.w3.org/mid/48B810F4.60807@aptest.com
>
> DaveO: Must specify how CURIEs and URI are disambiguated
>
> <jar> no, but it allows safecuries in other uri contexts, I believe.
> will check.
>
> <DanC> ok. deployment considerations for a/@href are somewhat
> special
>
> TVR: XSLT uses { } is attribute value templates. Use of a special
> character
>
> <jar> ok, URIorSafeCURIE only occurs in attributes that are newly
> added by RDFa
>
> <noah> I did propose text to Shane on 8/29:
>
> <noah> <proposed>
>
> <noah> CURIEs and safe-CURIEs map to IRIs, but neither a CURIE nor a
> safe-CURIE
>
> <noah> <italic>is</italic> an IRI or URI. Accordingly, CURIEs and
> safe-CURIEs
>
> <noah> MUST NOT be used as values for attributes that are specified
> to contain
>
> <noah> only URIs, IRIs, URI-references, IRI-references, etc.
> Specifications for
>
> <noah> particular attribute values or other content MAY be written
> to allow
>
> <noah> either CURIEs or IRIs (or URIs, etc.). The specifications for
> such
>
> <noah> languages MUST provide rules for disambiguition in situations
> where the
>
> <noah> same string could be interpreted as either a CURIE or an IRI.
> One way to
>
> <noah> do this is to require that all CURIEs be expressed as
> safe-CURIEs,
>
> <noah> implying that all unbracketed strings are to be interpreted
> as IRIs.
>
> <noah> </proposed>
>
> TVR: I'm mostly OK with this.
>
> <DanC> x:y
>
> JAR: I'm bothered by saying "CURIES are not IRIs". There are
> bstrings that are both.
>
> <DanC> noodling... "neither every CURIE nor every safe-CURIE
> <italic>is</italic> an IRI or URI"
>
> Noah: I will put this in a note to the TAG list and people can
> comment
>
> <noah> So, Stuart, what's the next step on the response.
>
> SKW: Let's conclude on email.
>
> <noah> SKW: Noah to redraft considering Stuart's proposal on intent
> of qnames and add 8/29 draft text on using CURIEs where URIs
> expected
>
> SKW: DanC, any progress on 171
>
> Dan: No.
>
> <DanC> p.s. any hosting issues?
>
> <DanC> hmm... decisions decisions...
>
> <DanC> collect all preparation materials in one place in the
> agenda...
>
> <DanC> or tuck them under the relevant items?
>
> <DanC> I lean toward tucking, so far
>
> <DanC> hmm... how to do a crawl-and-zip...?
>
> Summary of Action Items
>
> [End of minutes]
> _________________________________________________________
>
>
> Minutes formatted by David Booth's [22]scribe.perl version 1.128
> ([23]CVS log)
> $Date: 2008/09/15 15:05:41 $
>
> [22] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
> [23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
>
>
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2008 16:29:16 UTC