18-tagmem-minutes
67.2 KB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
1249
1250
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
1287
1288
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
1298
1299
1300
1301
1302
1303
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355
1356
1357
1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
1381
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
1392
1393
1394
1395
1396
1397
1398
1399
1400
1401
1402
1403
1404
1405
1406
1407
1408
1409
1410
1411
1412
1413
1414
1415
1416
1417
1418
1419
1420
1421
1422
1423
1424
1425
1426
1427
1428
1429
1430
1431
1432
1433
1434
1435
1436
1437
1438
1439
1440
1441
1442
1443
1444
1445
1446
1447
1448
1449
1450
1451
1452
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459
1460
1461
1462
1463
1464
1465
1466
1467
1468
1469
1470
1471
1472
1473
1474
1475
1476
1477
1478
1479
1480
1481
1482
1483
1484
1485
1486
1487
1488
1489
1490
1491
1492
1493
1494
1495
1496
1497
1498
1499
1500
1501
1502
1503
1504
1505
1506
1507
1508
1509
1510
1511
1512
1513
1514
1515
1516
1517
1518
1519
1520
1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545
1546
1547
1548
1549
1550
1551
1552
1553
1554
1555
1556
1557
1558
1559
1560
1561
1562
1563
1564
1565
1566
1567
1568
1569
1570
1571
1572
1573
1574
1575
1576
1577
1578
1579
1580
1581
1582
1583
1584
1585
1586
1587
1588
1589
1590
1591
1592
1593
1594
1595
1596
1597
1598
1599
1600
1601
1602
1603
1604
1605
1606
1607
1608
1609
1610
1611
1612
1613
1614
1615
1616
1617
1618
1619
1620
1621
1622
1623
1624
1625
1626
1627
1628
1629
1630
1631
1632
1633
1634
1635
1636
1637
1638
1639
1640
1641
1642
1643
1644
1645
1646
1647
1648
1649
1650
1651
1652
1653
1654
1655
1656
1657
1658
1659
1660
1661
1662
1663
1664
1665
1666
1667
1668
1669
1670
1671
1672
1673
1674
1675
1676
1677
1678
1679
1680
1681
1682
1683
1684
1685
1686
1687
1688
1689
1690
1691
1692
1693
1694
1695
1696
1697
1698
1699
1700
1701
1702
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html lang='en' xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
<head>
<meta name="generator" content=
"HTML Tidy for Mac OS X (vers 1st December 2004), see www.w3.org" />
<title>TAG Southampton Meeting, Day 2 -- 18 Sep 2007</title>
<link type="text/css" rel="STYLESHEET" href=
"http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/base.css" />
<link type="text/css" rel="STYLESHEET" href=
"http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/public.css" />
<link type="text/css" rel="STYLESHEET" href=
"http://www.w3.org/2004/02/minutes-style.css" />
<meta content="TAG Southampton Meeting, Day 2" name="Title" />
<meta content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" http-equiv=
"Content-Type" />
</head>
<body>
<p><a href="http://www.w3.org/"><img src=
"http://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_home" alt="W3C" border="0" height=
"48" width="72" /></a></p>
<h1>- DRAFT -</h1>
<h1>TAG Southampton Meeting, Day 2</h1>
<h2>18 Sep 2007</h2>
<p><a href=
'http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/17-agenda'>Agenda</a></p>
<p>See also: <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2007/09/18-tagmem-irc">IRC log</a></p>
<h2><a name="attendees" id="attendees">Attendees</a></h2>
<div class="intro">
<dl>
<dt>Present</dt>
<dd>Stuart_Williams, Noah_Mendelsohn, Tim_Berners-Lee*,
Norm_Walsh, Henry_S._Thompson, Dan_Connolly, Rhys_Lewis,
Dave_Orchard*, TV_Raman*</dd>
<dt>Regrets</dt>
<dd>Tim_Berners-Lee*, Dave_Orchard*, TV_Raman*</dd>
<dt>Chair</dt>
<dd>Stuart Williams</dd>
<dt>Scribe</dt>
<dd>Rhys, Norm</dd>
</dl>
</div>
<h2>Contents</h2>
<ul>
<li>
<a href="#agenda">Topics</a>
<ol>
<li><a href="#item01">TAG Planning and Review</a></li>
<li><a href="#item02">URNsAndRegistries-50
(ISSUE-50)</a></li>
<li><a href="#item03">xmlFunctions-34 (ISSUE-34)</a></li>
<li><a href="#item04">namespaceDocument-8
(ISSUE-8)</a></li>
<li><a href="#item05">Web 2.0 and Web Architecture (and TAG
Blog mechanics)</a></li>
<li><a href="#item06">Agenda review for the
afternoon</a></li>
<li><a href="#item07">reviewing the Cool URIs document
(ISSUE-57 cont.)</a></li>
<li><a href="#item08">XMLVersioning-41 (ISSUE-41
cont)</a></li>
<li><a href="#item09">TagSoupIntegration-54
(ISSUE-54)</a></li>
<li><a href="#item10">Thanks to the host</a></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li><a href="#ActionSummary">Summary of Action Items</a></li>
</ul>
<hr />
<div class="meeting">
<p class='phone'> </p>
<p class='phone'> </p>
<h3 id="item01">TAG Planning and Review</h3>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Rhys</cite>> Scribe: Rhys</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>scribe</cite>> Scribenick: Rhys</p>
<p class='phone'>discussion of TAG goals and directions</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Anything particular to report
to the November W3C membership meeting?</p>
<p class='phone'>discussion roams over maintenance of webarch
vol1, a 2nd vol, security, p2p, web 2.0, ...</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>RL:</cite> OpenAjax Alliance could be a
good place to start. The major players in Ajax libraries are
members</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2007/06/mobile-ajax/">http://www.w3.org/2007/06/mobile-ajax/</a></p>
<p class='phone'>Discussion about what TAG might do for the
workshop.</p>
<p class='phone'>TimBL edits an outline (@@copy/link)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NW:</cite> I think I'd be tempted to
draft the new document and then you could choose to move that
to modifications to the existing AWWW.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> Better to say that there is a
set of things on which we are working, and then decide where
the changes live</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Can see working on volume 2
leading to errata for volume 1<br />
... Asks how much of the list that Tim has produced could be
shared with the AC<br />
... Wraps up by asking if people are ok with use of tracker?
General feeling is positive.</p>
<h3 id="item02">URNsAndRegistries-50 (ISSUE-50)</h3><a name=
"action01" id="action01"></a>
<p class='irc'><<cite>scribe</cite>>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> <strong>[DONE]</strong> David Orchard
to explore the space of external registries and to post to the
tag member list. ACTION-32 [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action01">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action01</a>]</p><a name="action02"
id="action02"></a>
<p class='irc'><<cite>scribe</cite>>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Henry S. Thompson to revise
URNsAndRegistries-50 finding in response to F2F discussion
<strong>[CONTINUES]</strong> [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action02">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action02</a>]</p>
<p class='phone'>HT Looks at diary to try and get an estimate
for a date. End of October. Stuart updates the action due
date.</p>
<h3 id="item03">xmlFunctions-34 (ISSUE-34)</h3>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> Same date for Action 26 which
is part of issue 34. Stuart updates the action due
date</p><a name="action03" id="action03"></a>
<p class='irc'><<cite>scribe</cite>>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Henry S. Thompson to Henry to prepare
new draft of xmlFunctions-34 ACTION-26
<strong>[CONTINUES]</strong> [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action03">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action03</a>]</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Any discussion necessary
here?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> No. I have the notes on what
I want to write.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> points out that the GRDDL
specification (<a href=
"http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/)">http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/)</a>
references TAG issues 8 and 34.<br />
... The GRDDL spec postponed decision related to
xmlFunctions-34<br />
... I was wondering about urgency around these two issues. Now
that GRDDL is a rec, the urgency for that group has gone, but
the implementers will still be interested.</p>
<h3 id="item04">namespaceDocument-8 (ISSUE-8)</h3>
<p class='irc'><<cite>ht</cite>> <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/XML/2007/09/XMLSchema.html">http://www.w3.org/XML/2007/09/XMLSchema.html</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Projects the above
document</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> This is the draft namespace
document for XML Schema.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Projects the source,</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> Points out the <head
profile=.... which is the incantation that marks the document
as GRDDL enabled. The <link rel='transformation... together
with the profile attribute identifies the transformation to be
applied for GRDDL</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>ht</cite>> <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/XML/2007/09/xsd.owl">http://www.w3.org/XML/2007/09/xsd.owl</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> The stylesheet runs when you
want to extract the RDF from the document.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Projects <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/XML/2007/09/xsd.owl">http://www.w3.org/XML/2007/09/xsd.owl</a>
, which is the RDF from the namespace document</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> Describes the resulting RDF,
which he anticipates that DC and TBL probably won't like.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Opens the tabulator</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> Describes the appearance of
the OWL in the tabulator<br />
... Datatype includes the list of XML Schema datatypes. This
was one of the things that DC wanted to see in the RDF
generated from the namespace document.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> So is the transformation
stylesheet generic or specific to this namespace document?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> It's mainly generic with some
specific parts for the schema datatypes<br />
... Based this on Norm's work, but changed it.<br />
... Explains the approach in the RDF. Shows use of RDDL
validation 'purpose'</p><a name="action04" id="action04"></a>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> HenryS to fix .htaccess in 2007/09 so
that .owl files get the right mime type [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action04">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action04</a>]</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> Describes the natureKey and
target properties and their relationship<br />
... Invites Tim and Dan to look at the three documents which
embody a proposal for how to use RDDL with namespace
documents</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Stuart</cite>> <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#boolean">http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#boolean</a></p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>ht</cite>> <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/XML/2007/09/XMLSchema.html#boolean">http://www.w3.org/XML/2007/09/XMLSchema.html#boolean</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> When the document is
installed then URIs of the form above will be available to the
Tabulator.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Let me put in English what I
think is happening. In this case, the spirit of what you are
doing is that we had a problem with RDDL natures and purposes
where the URIs seemed to be of the wrong class. This approach
is not implementing an inverse functional property.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> It's not an inverse
functional relationship, because the same relationship might
apply between multiple objects</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> The relationship is between
three things.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NW:</cite> One triple isn't enough.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Feels right about the
relationships involved. It looks rigorous. But if any normal
user has to do all of this then it looks a problem.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> They don't have to. This will
all be part of RDDL.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Ok, so this is now grounded
in RDF. I want to add this to some other RDF that I'm creating.
Are they going to be able to use this?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> Yes.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NW:</cite> Does this shape of model
address the issue about using DTDs and Schemas as natures?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> As one of those people, I'm
happy that this addresses that.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> We need to talk about the URI
in the type of the namespace.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> "This type of
information resource is called a namespace document. " --
<a href=
"http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#namespace-document">http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#namespace-document</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> Should be calling it
NamespaceDocument, not Namespace<br />
... We should be getting it via a 303</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> "Another benefit
of using URIs to build XML namespaces is that the namespace URI
can be used to identify an information resource that contains
useful information, machine-usable and/or human-usable, about
terms in the namespace. This type of information resource is
called a namespace document. "</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Disagrees</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> What would be the use of
introducing a new concept like 303 for the namespace
document.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I don't necessarily agree
that all information resources are documents. The term
namespaces was introduced by XML. The namespace documents are
whatever that namespace defines them to be.<br />
... I see those documents as information resources. A namespace
means you have a URI, and whoever owns it gets to say what is
defined and what is not</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>ht</cite>> Here is the finding
where the TAG defines what a namespace is: <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/namespaceState.html">http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/namespaceState.html</a></p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (no. the namespace
document is not a representation of the resource in question;
it _is_ the resource in question. "This type of information
resource is called a namespace document. " )</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I think that can be
transferred in a message. I view the namespace document as a
representation of the resource that is identified as the
namespace URI</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>ht</cite>> HST's position:
Namespaces are ineffable, identified by namespace URI,
namespace documents have information about them, 303 is
appropriate</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> that does justify the 200
return code rather than 303 on access to the namespace URI</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>ht</cite>> TBL's position:
Namespaces and namespace documents can usefully share a URI, so
200 is appropriate</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>ht</cite>> NM's position:
Namespaces are information resources, of which namespace
documents are representations, so 200 is appropriate</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> I think there is a clash of
cultures from two communities. I can live with the story that
Noah has told of there being a representation of the namespace
that is returned on access.<br />
... I think the semweb community does actually use two URIs,
one with a trailing # and one without. One identifies the
namespace, the other allows me to retrieve a
representation.<br />
... The XML community doesn't use the trailing # and so has
only one to identify the namespace. To identify the document,
there would have to be another, perhaps unrelated, URI</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> It's true that the URIs with
the # exist, but I've never found that I actually had to write
statements about the URI with the #<br />
... Which is why I asked Henry the question about this extra
node in the RDF</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> It's because it is the
namespace that is the subject of these statements, not the
namespace document.#</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Sometimes the subject of a
normative reference is a datatype, sometimes, in this RDF</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> That's right.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Zakim</cite>> Norm, you wanted to
ask what the URI of the XML Schema namespace *is* if the
putative URI is a URI for the XML Namespace Document</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NW:</cite> If XML schema is the URI of
the namespace document, then what is the URI of the namespace?
Think this has been overtaken by Stuart's comment</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> Think that what the XML
community thinks of as the URI of the namespace is actually the
URI of the namespace document</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> There is definitely one
resource, which is the namespace, and may return a
representation. But there is nothing that precludes us from
creating a second URI for the document.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> The RDF community has never
really concerned itself with namespaces. You could make
assertions about them, but in practice it doesn't happen.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> TAG has published documents
that discuss namespaces and properties of namespaces and we
have to build a story about that.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (where does
<a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/namespaceState.html">http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/namespaceState.html</a>
say anything about namespaces? it says things about names in a
namespace)</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Zakim</cite>> DanC_lap, you wanted
to note that this { <XMLSchema> rdf:type xml:Namespace }
invites unending philosophical discussion and doesn't seem to
be necessary to address</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Norm</cite>> If we think that
hashless URIs are for documents, we need to use 303 for the
ones that we use as namespaces and we have to encourage XML
authors to use hashed URIs. Maybe.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> The impasse we're stuck in
would go away if we deleted the rdf:type</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> If we do decide to do that,
we could close this issue. But I think it will bite us in
future and we should probably open a new issue to cover
this</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>ht</cite>> HT: Right, we've
addressed the requirements we came in to this with w/o the
rdf:type, so I can live with dropping it</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> What would that issue
cover?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> The question is what do XML
namespace URIs, as used in the existing web of XML, identify.
What kinds of things are they?</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (we've "run into
the sand" in that we have 2 coherent positions, neither has
convinced the other, and no new information seems to be
forthcoming)</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>timbl</cite>> <a href=
"http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2005/ajar/ajaw/tab">http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2005/ajar/ajaw/tab</a></p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>timbl</cite>> <a href=
"http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2005/ajar/ajaw/tab?uri=http://www.w3.org/XML/2007/09/xsd.owl">
http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2005/ajar/ajaw/tab?uri=http://www.w3.org/XML/2007/09/xsd.owl</a></p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>ht</cite>> That it is reasonable
(indeed recommended) to serve something in response to a GET on
a namespace URI is uncontested</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>ht</cite>> But until we can say
whether the resource identified by a (traditional/OF XML)
namespace URI is an information resource or not, we don't know
whether or not to reply with a 200 or a 303</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> The later version of the
tabulator (see above URI) infers information from the HTTP
headers, including the response code.<br />
... This inference of the result being a document is from the
TAG finding. (document is a pun for information resource in
this case)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> I think that I heard Henry
and Norm take an action to produce a new draft of the
finding</p><a name="action05" id="action05"></a>
<p class='irc'><<cite>scribe</cite>>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Norm to produce a new draft of the
namespace documents finding based on 18 Sep discussion
(@@trackbot got it?) [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action05">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action05</a>]</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>trackbot-ng</cite>> Sorry, couldn't
find user - Norm</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> trackbot-ng,
status</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> Rhys, try
Norman</p>
<p class='phone'>Note to scribe to fix up the action to be
against Norm</p>
<p class='phone'>Issue is Self-Describing Web</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I have a set of comments
against the last draft. Have double checked with Tim about
interest in a new draft. So lets continue the action. I feel
that I know what to do.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (this relates to
URI-based extensibility and standardizedFieldValues-51 )</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> How about aiming for a draft
in time for tech plenary week. How about November 2nd?</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Zakim</cite>> ht, you wanted to
point to <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/namespaceState.html">http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/namespaceState.html</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Observes that there is an
overlap with URI-based extensibility and would that be
something for TP panel?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Could be appropriate. Bug me
for slides if you want them.<br />
... Should we go through the webarch presentation over
lunch?</p>
<p class='phone'>[break for lunch]</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Norm</cite>> ScribeNick: Norm</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>scribe</cite>> Scribe: Norm</p>
<h3 id="item05">Web 2.0 and Web Architecture (and TAG Blog
mechanics)</h3>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> At Google, we said this was a
place where we'd like to do somethinking, but we haven't really
bitten into it at all.<br />
... One of the questions for me is, when you have the
client-side scripting stuff, the representations behave
differently becauase they actually interact back with the
servers<br />
... Application interaction, not just animation and
forms.<br />
... There are questions about web architecture, bookmarking;
we've had a bit of a thread about fragement identifiers and
scripting.<br />
... Are there other factors of web 2.0 that might be stressing
the architecture as we have writ it.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> I'd like to add the
cross-domain scripting issue. I don't even know what's
happening in the relevant constituencies.<br />
... TimBL describe some work, we should check on that.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Is that the access control
proposal?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Yes, that's it.</p>
<p class='phone'>The "public:" HTTP header</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Is this stuff covered by
webarch? Yes, sort of. Some parts get relearned, like when to
use GET<br />
... One of the episodes was the google accelerator which would
follow GET links so if they did deletes, that was an
issue.<br />
... It seems like people are paying a lot of attention to the
URI space that they're using and when to use GET/POST.<br />
... Sometimes it's nice if the folks using your work know about
it so they read it.<br />
... What's starting to get deployed that isn't described by
specs is the fragment identifers that don't mean anything if
the javascript isn't there.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> When you first go to Google
Maps, it appears to violate the principle that things should
have URIs. But if you look closely, you can get it.<br />
... But there are issues there about how many other
implementors would have taken the care to do that.<br />
... Obviously there must be issues with keeping the address bar
constantly up-to-date.<br />
... Is anyone drilling on that?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> The OpenAJAX folks.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> No, I mean on our side. It
can be very seductive to give a URI to the beginning.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Oh, right, it used to be free
and now it isn't.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> And it might be quite
difficult.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>RL:</cite> We might want to explore what
states do benefit from having a URI?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Yes, but I think if we went
to the OpenAjax folks, we could ask of the library
implementors, how easy do you make it for your users to get
URIs?</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>>
(priority[tag_blog]++ )</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Once users are getting value
out of something, it tends to persist. But they need to know
that there's something there. A link to a map instead of a PDF
of the directions.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Stuart</cite>> FYI... WAF-WG WD on
"Enabling Read Access for Web Resources" is at <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/TR/access-control/">http://www.w3.org/TR/access-control/</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Another side of this issue is
the economics of the situation. I think it's very interesting
to look at the fact that Wikipedia works but lots fo things
built out of MediaWiki don't. Why?<br />
... How much value do you have to give to how many people
before something takes off?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> That's a web science sort of
question, but not really a web architecture sort of
question</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>RL:</cite> I think Noah<br />
... Noah's question about Ajax libraries and URIs is a good
one.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I'm still uncomfortable with
the "Web 2.0" banner. I think they're all important. (Scribe
may not have followed)<br />
... In carrying things under the Web 2.0 banner, we risk
confusion.<br />
... Web 2.0: Rich Interaction, Web 2.0: something else</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NW:</cite> I'd be just as happy to lose
the Web 2.0 prefix in that case.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Maybe blogging is the right
answer here.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Maybe, but one of our
responsibilities is to liase with external organizations. My
first question is, are they paying attention to the right
issues.<br />
... If we find that they aren't, then we need to think about
the right awy to preceed.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>RL:</cite> It sounds like trawling
through some of the libraries might be useful.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Or maybe just contacting the
implementors and asking them.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> The mutterings of "blog"
reminded me that we had an action on Tim wrt investigating URIs
that we might use.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> Ok, I talked to Dan and
found some things out. All the /blog/ URIs use an
infrastructure we don't want to use.<br />
... I don't want to go with /tag/blog, because it sets a bad
precedent.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Do you want to propose a
URI?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> /2001/tag/blog?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> There are certainly TAG
members who object.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> I think Raman objects on the
grounds that remembering /2001/ is rude.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> I forced /2001/tag/blog over
Raman's objection. I ultimately became uncomfortable with that
course of action.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I played a role in this,
because I commented on the WBS form. I can say that anything
that works for you guys works for me.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> There was /blog/tag that was
a close second, but it has the infrastructure limitation.</p>
<p class='phone'>Some discussion of the infrastructure
issues</p>
<p class='phone'>It would be nice to be able to migrate between
blog engines.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Yes, but we don't have that
problem.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> We could ask for /blog/tag
and ask for it to be movable type.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Movable type is not a
supported blog tool (by the W3C admin staff)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Do all of these give you
moderately good control over styling?<br />
... I explored this with HTML and CSS.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Yes, I expect you can because
it's popular.<br />
... Two intersting things about the Movable Type system are
that (1) it would build the readership of the /qa blog that
we're using for HTML, and (2) it uses the bake not fry model.
GETs are just regular web pages. If the infrastructure falls
over, the pages still stay there.<br />
... The downside is that you have to wait 15 minutes to see
what it looks like.</p>
<p class='phone'>Some discussion of that problem.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Maybe we should go with the
supported stuff and if the blog falls over its their fault.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Word press?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> One of the issues was that
community blogs with multiple authors was not directly
supported by Word press. It could be a non-issue these days,
but when the system team was picking, it was an issue.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Who cares what tool we
use?</p>
<p class='phone'>Several hands</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Zakim</cite>> timbl, you wanted to
say we actually have also talked for example about web sites,
which have no URIs in the architecture either. namespaces are
similar</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Zakim</cite>> Norm, you wanted to
say that if we decide that aa hashless URI must be the
namespace *document* then the bit I said above</p>
<p class='phone'>(NOTE FROM SCRIBE, SHOULD HAVE DRAINED QUEUE
DIFFERENTLY)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I care a lot if it interferes
with what it appearance.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> I don't see how we're going
to make a choice other than picking one and trying.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> I've done some research and
proposed Moveable Type.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> I'm more than happy with
that.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NW:</cite> I was sort of hoping that I'd
be able to just inject my atom entries into the TAG blog feed,
not cut and paste. But I could live with cut and paste, I
guess</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Here are the results of the
survey I setup earlier.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Stuart</cite>> <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34270/BlogURI/results">http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34270/BlogURI/results</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> By my reckoning /blog/tag
wins.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> I just don't know if it's
feasible.</p><a name="action06" id="action06"></a>
<p class='irc'><<cite>scribe</cite>>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Dan to investigate the feasibility of
having a Movable Type blog at /blog/tag [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action06">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action06</a>]</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>trackbot-ng</cite>> Created
ACTION-49 - Investigate the feasibility of having a Movable
Type blog at /blog/tag [on Dan Connolly - due 2007-09-25].</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> That was introduced by the
notion of writing blogs in the Web 2.0 space, I think we can
return there now.<br />
... TBL's action can now be marked as done.<br />
... So, DC, you think it might be more effective to write blogs
in this area?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Yep.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NW:</cite> I think it's worth a
try.<br />
... I've been looking at Ajax; I might have a blog post in that
space.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>RL:</cite> I'm interested in that
too</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> It's interesting that the
lack of modularity in Javascript is a serious problem in
projects like the Tabulator</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Oh! I have an almost finished
blog post about that!</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> <a href=
"http://homer.w3.org/~connolly/projects/grddljs/raw-file/f51f4e01ea4b/devnotes.html">
http://homer.w3.org/~connolly/projects/grddljs/raw-file/f51f4e01ea4b/devnotes.html</a></p>
<p class='phone'>Some informal discussion of various aspect of
Javascript</p>
<p class='phone'>and Javascript programming. Implied global
variables; code compression; compilation; etc.</p>
<p class='phone'>Some discussion of the xmlHttpRequest spec and
the state of the world wrt its examples</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> So this is a possible blog
entry.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Yes.<br />
... One message is "lack of a module system" hurts.</p><a name=
"action07" id="action07"></a>
<p class='irc'><<cite>scribe</cite>>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Rhys to investigate two AJAX libraries
and see how well they support exposing URIs for intermediate
results. [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action07">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action07</a>]</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>trackbot-ng</cite>> Created
ACTION-50 - Investigate two AJAX libraries and see how well
they support exposing URIs for intermediate results. [on Rhys
Lewis - due 2007-09-25].</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> trackbot-ng,
ACTION-50 is due in a month</p>
<h3 id="item06">Agenda review for the afternoon</h3>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> We'll work on TAG Soup after
the break.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> I'd like to come back to
HTTP redirections.</p>
<p class='phone'>Some discussion of the overlap between Rhys's
HTTP range finding and the Cool URIs document.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> I think we should say that
301 should always generate a warning<br />
... I think the purl.org folks use this.<br />
... And we should say that 302 should bookmark the *original*
URI.</p>
<p class='phone'>Some planning discussion for how to organize
the rest of the day</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (hmm... yes, 301
and 302 have this link updating meaning... it's less clear to
me why that needs TAG attention; it's in the HTTP spec,
no?)</p>
<h3 id="item07">reviewing the Cool URIs document (ISSUE-57
cont.)</h3>
<p class='phone'><cite>RL:</cite> Yesterday we were trying to
get through the Cool URIs review which is a prerequisite for
some of the other decisions</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>timbl</cite>> <a href=
"https://gnowsis.opendfki.de/repos/gnowsis/papers/2006_11_concepturi/html/cooluris_sweo_note.html">
https://gnowsis.opendfki.de/repos/gnowsis/papers/2006_11_concepturi/html/cooluris_sweo_note.html</a></p>
<p class='phone'>Continuing review at section 3. URIs for
Real-World Objects</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NW:</cite> I think the second sentence
of the third paragraph should say "access" or "dereference" not
"look up"</p>
<p class='phone'>Some discussion of the colloquial use of "look
up"</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NW:</cite> If no one else is bothered by
it, I won't press the point.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> We run into the definition
of information resource in the last paragraph of section
3.<br />
... Suppose you were to make a mistake here, then you'd use a
URI for the resource and return a document.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> The mistake is to have a URI
for Alice and have it return 200.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> But what about the case of
the bible; are they being clear enough about the distinction
between a document and metadata about it?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>HT:</cite> That doesn't make what's
written there wrong, just incomplete.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>raman</cite>> raman from the bus to
work</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> Suppose you always had two
distinct resources?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> No, it says "not clearly and
obviously a document"</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I'm tempted here to push a
bit on the distinction between "information resource" and
"document"<br />
... There are things that I choose to believe are information
resources that aren't documents.</p>
<p class='phone'>TBL For instance?</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>timbl</cite>>
----------------------</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> For me, documents have a
beginning a middle and an end.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>timbl</cite>> A relational
table</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> For example, a relational
table. The rows have no order in the database.<br />
... So it doesn't have a beginning, middle and end.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> What about a relational
table in a CSV file?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> That's a specific
serialization of the table.<br />
... The CSV file is a document. The point is that when you have
DB2 or Oracle, the table isn't in general stored in anything
that you could identify as serial or continuous.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> But a table is information,
right?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> An RDF graph is another
example. It's an information resource but not a document.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> You slipped into the
"representation" sense of document.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>raman</cite>> Does a hypertext
document that is a directory index truly have a beginning an
end and a middle?</p>
<p class='phone'>(Scribe may not have recorded the slip
accurately)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> The reason that I'm
re-raising this is because this says "if you have the least
doubt that something is a document" then do something else
(hash or 303).<br />
... If I believe a relational table, I think I should be able
to return a 200.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> We agree about the
information resource, but maybe not the document. Can you think
of something that we might disagree is an information
resource.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Can I try a few more.<br />
... An rdf:Class?<br />
... The integer 7.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> thumbs down; NM: thumbs
up.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> A set of integers</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> thumbs down; NM: thumbs
up.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NW:</cite> What about the set of numbers
written in an HTML document?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> That's a borderline
case.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> What about the set of
integers that are the primes less than 30?</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>raman</cite>> given <a href=
"http://examples.com/integers">http://examples.com/integers</a>
how can you tell if I generated the integers or whether I wrote
it in an html file?</p>
<p class='phone'>Beats me, raman :-)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> A picture with random black
and white pixels?<br />
... Yes, it's an information resource. It's not very
useful.<br />
... If the thing has a name or has other properties attached to
it, then it's definitely an information resource.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> I think I could go with a set
of numbers being an information resource but not an individual
number.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NW:</cite> I could believe *anything*
can be an information resource, that it's not a meaningful
distinction.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Is there a URI for each
integer?</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>raman</cite>> <a href=
"http://example.com/integers#7">http://example.com/integers#7</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> I'd have to think about that
a little bit; I think you could do it with data: URIs.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>RL:</cite> An observation: when you said
relational table, TBL may have hard "data in the table, plus
columns, and column names"</p>
<p class='phone'>(Scribe notes: TBL left room to take a phone
call)</p>
<p class='phone'>Break for 15 minutes</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>raman</cite>> I think this
distinction is a red herring and mostly bogus (this == document
vs information resource) document is better thought of as a
serialization of a resource</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Stuart</cite>> serialisation of a
resource.... or it's current state?</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>raman</cite>> serialization of the
current state of the resource</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Stuart</cite>> Yes dave... just
about to dail in ourselves</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Stuart</cite>> zakim this will be
tag</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>raman</cite>> will call in like I
did yesterday about 10 minutes before the hour. Still on the
bus going to work</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>timbl</cite>> Raman said, 'I think
this distinction is a red herring and mostly bogus (this ==
document vs information resource) document is better thought of
as a serialization of a resource"</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Stuart</cite>> Ok... raman... we'll
get going as best we can... Tim will likely depart 15min before
the hour.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>raman</cite>> will dial in at 14:50
UTC 15:50 BST</p>
<p class='phone'>Meeting resumes</p>
<h3 id="item08">XMLVersioning-41 (ISSUE-41 cont)</h3>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> I posted some updates to the
terminologies and strategies last night.<br />
... I made some of the edit's Tim suggested wrt language and
extensions. We now require a mapping function of some
kind.<br />
... The interesting corrolary is that languages like
WS-Security aren't extensible.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (looking at
<a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-20070917.html">http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-20070917.html</a>
... )</p>
<p class='phone'>WS-Security mandates a fault if there's
anything unrecognizable, so even though the schema has
wildcards, it isn't extensible.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>scribe:</cite> I reworded other parts to
reflect these changes.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> How do you feel we're
doing?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> I think we're making
progress. I think maybe it would be OK if we never got to
finishing the XML document and concentrated on the others.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> There was some feeling here
that there'd be value in seeing stories about various
strategies that have actually been deployed.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> I've been using HTML as an
example but it sounds like folks want more.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> I think the strategies
document with some stories added to help people understand is
going to be more effective.<br />
... More effective than making it mathematically coherent. But
the terminology document is useful to help make us
understand.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> Stuart was moving us to
having more examples in the terminology document as well.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> I was thinking of small, toy
languages to illustrate the various sets and other terms.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> That would be fine by me.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I was a little surprised at
what Tim said because I thought a lot of the drift of the
discussion yesterday was that we needed to connect teh strategy
stuff to the terminology.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>dorchard</cite>> Here's the sets
with more examples on xml.com</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>dorchard</cite>> <a href=
"http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2006/12/20/a-theory-of-compatible-versions.html?page=1">
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2006/12/20/a-theory-of-compatible-versions.html?page=1</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> We don't want to intimidate
novice readers, but some detail in the terminology could be
used to build in strategies.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Zakim</cite>> Noah, you wanted to
encourage tie to terminology</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Not putting it in people's
faces I understand, but leaving them disconnected seems
wrong.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> Maybe the terms are two
technical.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I still have some
reservations about whether or not accept set and defined set
are going to be useful terms.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>timbl</cite>> TBL: Don't use the
terms differently i the two docs.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I agree that wouldn't be good
in the strategies document.<br />
... I don't want to build up all that terminology if we aren't
going to use it. We could kill it but I think that would be
unfortuante.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Dave, do you have a top three
messages you'd like to get out?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> "Make languages extensible"
is the top one, but then there others that fall out of
that.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> But what does extensible
mean?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> Exactly</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> I think you have to be
careful that you don't wind up begging the question.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> So if someone says "how do I
do that", do we have an answer/</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> We did have an answer for XML
Schema about four years ago. But the pushback has generally
been that we need to be more balanced in our treatment of
versioning.<br />
... So we've made a more generalized document, but I've tried
to collect all the non-XML related ones together in the
forwards-compatibility section of the strategies
document.<br />
... Forwards compatibility is 2.2.2, backwards compatibility is
2.2.3, etc.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> I'd like to give war stories
from W3C specs. Not necessarily things that you were involved
in.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> If examples need to be
introduced to illustrate what we mean, I would have preferred
to use an example language that's being created so that someone
now would be able to follow the rules.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> What sticks with people is a
horror story. You can point out that HTML grew because it had
an extensibility story that worked. I wonder if something like
CSS has had problems.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> I can think of many XML
languages that have had extensibility problems.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> Can you think of something
specific? Maybe something like the validator not taking
extensibility into account.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> We could use XML 1.1 as our
horror story.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> AS a failure. Yep, that
works.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>dorchard</cite>> :-)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> XML didn't follow many of the
guidelines that were available in the forwards compatible
section.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I think we need to step back
a little, XML is extensible in many dimensions just not all of
them.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> We would like to record our
thanks to W3C for hosting last night's supper.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>TBL:</cite> Our local hosts provided the
transport, thanks to them too.</p>
<p class='phone'>TBL departs.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> One thing this has provoked
is that XML 1.0 and 1.1 is a poster child for versioning
problems. But do we really think that the versioning finding is
going to go into that much detail? If not, then I'm not sure
there's value in showing failures.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> There are success
stories.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> What about http? There's been
a pretty good migration from 1.0 to 1.1, hasn't there?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> I picked HTML not HTTP
because is HTML is a W3C spec.</p>
<p class='phone'>Some discussion of W3C involved in HTTP</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> I was trying to pick a
language format not a protocol, because the tradeoffs are
different.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> The number of folks who know
the HTML story well enough to follow are probably much greater
than for HTTP. I withdraw the suggestion.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> So that'll make it into the
terminology finding.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> That was supposed to really
press the accept set/defined set. But I'm not sure it's usfule
without a deep discussion.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Does anyone have a strong
sense of how we make progress from where we are?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> I got feedback to introduce
more examples and on the terminology section.<br />
... There's work I can do, but I don't know if we would feel
like we'd gotten measurably closer to being done with these
documents, I don't know.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> If you think about where the
end of the tunnel is, it's difficult to estimate where that is,
partly because we've been at it so long.<br />
... You end up down in the document and not necessarily
standing back to see if what we're doing is in support of the
goals.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>raman</cite>> stuck in traffic will
be closer to the hour than not before I call in.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> I'm not sure that "fix this"
"fix this" "fix this" is going to wind up bringing us closer to
completion.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> Yes. I wanted to tell a story
more about XML versioning; now we've got a much broader story.
I hope we don't expand it any further.<br />
... Some folks have been advocating for a cookbook
approach.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> We've got three documents;
one of the things that's bruising on all of us is the size. If
we wanted to pick one piece, which would it be?<br />
... I would suggest the strategies document.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I still think we're thrashing
around. I don't think we've determined what success is. The
documents should be in service to a goal.<br />
... Five to ten pages turns into weeks and months of TAG
effort. So I think first of all, we should imagine that the
final documents will be much smaller.<br />
... My feeling is there should be a small number of main points
and it should be possible to enumerate them quickly and
concisely.<br />
... For example, we give the community a small number of terms
for usefully discussing the issues; show them how to make
content is forwards-compatible; etc. Basically, get to the
point where we can say here are our goals 1, 2, 3, 4...<br />
... Then write out a ToC and start to fill it in so that we
know we're going to achieve those goals.<br />
... Get some agreement about the message and work on
fullfilling that.<br />
... I think lots of people come to this with assumptions that
they don't even know they have.<br />
... So I'd like to bring a little bit of rigor from the
terminology and a few small problems.<br />
... In that sense, I think we should build up from zero,
starting with the text Dave has already written.<br />
... That's my reaction to "pick a part".</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> I'd be totally fine if we had
a document that said "Versioning: Fowards Compatibility" and we
just focused on that.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (hmm... reducing
the scope to "Forward Compatibility" sounds interesting.)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> But this focussed approach
sounds nice and is very hard to deliver on. Review tends to
make the scope creep.<br />
... As soon as we say that we should have this particular
focus, the yardsticks change and we end up pushing into
different areas trying for complete coverage.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Dan says that reducing scope
to fowards compatibilit sounds interesting</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Noah</cite>> Forwards compat sounds
just a bit narrow, but once you have it explained, is talking
about backwards compat really much more than a para or two?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> One of the problems is that
we're having a hard time concentrating on a piece of work small
enough to accomplish consensus. The bigger it is, the harder it
is to win consensus.<br />
... I think we need to wrap this little piece up before we move
along.<br />
... Trying to follow up on what Noah is suggesting, I think
that requires that we stand back a bit from the artifacts that
we have and go back to the process of picking our messages.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> Standing back in a sense; I
think we'd go through the documents and try to summarize each
section in a sentence or two and then try to prioritize
that.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> I could take a stab at that
for the strategies document.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I think we need to iterate
over that as a group until we have consensus on the ToC.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> I wonder if Dave could use a
buddy for that to shorten the feedback loop</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> I'd like to focus on things
with a length of 1 sentence.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> I don't think we can continue
that exercise at this meeting.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (I think the
Dave's done what somebody can do about page counts.)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> I'd like to take a stab at
reducing the strategies document down to something more
focussed</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> I think what Noah wanted was
basically one or two sentences of meta-statement about each
section. And work down from the top.<br />
... I'm hanging back on putting an action on Dave because I'm
afraid it won't be successful.<br />
... Something coming back with a consensus of two would be an
improvement, I think.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> target: ~3
one-sentence points, touching on stories invoving HTML, XSLT,
and XML 1.1</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Raman:</cite> We've been changing the
requirements.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NM:</cite> I don't think they've ever
been defined.</p><a name="action08" id="action08"></a>
<p class='irc'><<cite>scribe</cite>>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> David and Dan work together to
articulate the versioning story that the TAG wants to tell.
[recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action08">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action08</a>]</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>trackbot-ng</cite>> Created
ACTION-51 - And Dan work together to articulate the story that
the TAG wants to tell. [on David Orchard - due 2007-09-25].</p>
<p class='phone'>trackbot-ng, action-51 due 2007-09-26</p>
<h3 id="item09">TagSoupIntegration-54 (ISSUE-54)</h3>
<p class='phone'>Review of agenda and actions</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> ACTION-7 was on Dan</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> That remains open; I got as
far as trying to set it up and finding out that the
intersection of available times was empty.<br />
... There's a corresponding thread in email; let's look
there.</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> Re: XML,
namespaces, extensibility and validation Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 5 September)</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> <a href=
"http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Sep/0012.html">
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Sep/0012.html</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> One possibility is to
prototype a new validator that can do new elements in a
namespace using XSD<br />
... There's a little mail there; I'll continue to work on the
action.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> New due date?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Check in a week.</p><a name=
"action09" id="action09"></a>
<p class='irc'><<cite>scribe</cite>>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Dan Connolly to Work with Olivier and
Tim to draft a position regarding extensibility of HTML and the
role of the validator for consideration by the TAG ACTION-7
<strong>[CONTINUES]</strong> [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action09">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action09</a>]</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (ideally,
trackbot-ng would track the date of our next meeting, and
"ACTION-7 continues" by default would set the due date to the
date of the next meeting)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> ACTION-44 was on Dave; but
Dave's not here.<br />
... What about the Tag Soup Integration topic list</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Stuart</cite>> <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/tag-soup-integration">http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/tag-soup-integration</a></p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Raman:</cite> We said we'd use it as a
scratch pad to write down the ideas and issues that we have for
discussion; it's not something I imagined that we'd
publish.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> In terms of discussion today,
is it a good guide?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Raman:</cite> Seems fine to me.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> I'd like to pick #3: XML or
HTML serialization from View Source<br />
... Should new authors learn to put "/" in their br tags?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>NW:</cite> YES!</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> Do you have any arguments I
could use to convince others?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Raman:</cite> The argument against using
balanced tags and XML empty elements is about ease of
authoring; but I don't think it works in the long run.</p>
<p class='phone'>(DID THE SCRIBE GET THAT RIGHT?)</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (yes, I agree it's
more straightforward to teach HTML as XML; that's what I hear
from educators.)</p>
<p class='phone'>Scribe attempts to participate and fails to
scribe or participate effectively</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Raman:</cite> Because I have a parser
that accepts some gunk, to use that as an excuse to encourage
authors to write more gunk is bad</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> That's not their argument,
their argument is that it's easier to teach HTML.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Raman:</cite> Well, I don't believe
that, but it's just a matter of opinion.<br />
... Time will tell.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> One task I'm looking for is
someone to write a tutorial on how to write an HTML
document.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Raman:</cite> That's going to vary
depending on the biases of who you ask.<br />
... You can't claim that I didn't write HTML because I balanced
my tags.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> I guess some harm could be
done, but at this point I'd like anything. I've got 43 authors
interested and no one delivering.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> What about the authoring
communities out there?</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Zakim</cite>> Rhys, you wanted to
say isn't ambiguity an issue for poorly written HTML?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> There are lots of them, but I
can't get them to participate in the working group.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>RL:</cite> Apart from the religious
differences about which is easier, isn't there ambiguity in the
tag soup case?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> The working hypothesis is
that most of the ambiguity has gone away because the browsers
have reverse engineered a lot of it.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Ian Hickson has written about
the difference between the DOMs constructed which plays into
the scripting problem.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> For 90% of the web, you can
just use the html5lib code and it works.</p>
<p class='phone'>Some wandering discussion of or respective
recollections of history</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Rhys</cite>> <a href=
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Postel">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Postel</a></p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Rhys</cite>> Appears in <a href=
"http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc793">http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc793</a></p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Rhys</cite>> Interesting that the
RFC quotes it as "TCP implementations will follow a general
principle of robustness: be</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Rhys</cite>> conservative in what
you do, be liberal in what you accept from</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Rhys</cite>> others."</p>
<p class='irc'><<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (<a href=
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postel%27s_law">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postel%27s_law</a>
<a href=
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_Principle">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_Principle</a>
)</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Raman:</cite> Attribute quoting is not
the problem.<br />
... If unquoted attributes were the only thing we had to open
up to have clean markup, I'd accept that compromise
today.<br />
... it's far far worse.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Worse how?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Raman:</cite> The way scripting is bound
to HTML is just not well defined.<br />
... Scripts that write HTML that includes scripts do this by
writing partial tags and other things that no computer
scientest would ever have accepted.<br />
... They didn't have a tree and now they need one</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> There are applications where
you'd think that was out of scope<br />
... Link searching, for example</p>
<p class='phone'>Raman/HT: No, that just doesn't work. Many,
many links are constructed by script.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Raman:</cite> There are things that
people need to see and things that machines need to see. Lots
of things are hidden behind scripting. Mostly for Google,
people make sure the stuff they want indexed isn't hidden.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DO:</cite> This reminds me of the issues
we discovered in the State finding about URIs hidden in
cookies.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>Raman:</cite> Cookies are the next
level, that's state management. There's two layers: the shallow
web and the deep web.<br />
... Over time, as the stuff not indexed by today's methods
grows, something will have to change.</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>SW:</cite> Dan, you started us down this
route with a question about teaching HTML. Is there any
conclusion?</p>
<p class='phone'><cite>DC:</cite> I'm slightly more depressed
than when we started; I learned a few things.</p>
<h3 id="item10">Thanks to the host</h3>
<p class='irc'><<cite>Rhys</cite>> RESOLVED: thanks to
Susan Davies for the organisation of this face to face
meeting.</p>
</div>
<h2><a name="ActionSummary" id="ActionSummary">Summary of Action
Items</a></h2><!-- Action Items -->
<strong>[NEW]</strong> <strong>ACTION:</strong> Dan to
investigate the feasibility of having a Movable Type blog at
/blog/tag [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action06">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action06</a>]<br />
<strong>[NEW]</strong> <strong>ACTION:</strong> David and Dan
work together to articulate the versioning story that the TAG
wants to tell. [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action08">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action08</a>]<br />
<strong>[NEW]</strong> <strong>ACTION:</strong> HenryS to fix
.htaccess in 2007/09 so that .owl files get the right mime type
[recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action04">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action04</a>]<br />
<strong>[NEW]</strong> <strong>ACTION:</strong> Norm to produce a
new draft of the namespace documents finding based on 18 Sep
discussion (@@trackbot got it?) [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action05">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action05</a>]<br />
<strong>[NEW]</strong> <strong>ACTION:</strong> Rhys to
investigate two AJAX libraries and see how well they support
exposing URIs for intermediate results. [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action07">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action07</a>]<br />
 <br />
<strong>[PENDING]</strong> <strong>ACTION:</strong> Dan Connolly
to Work with Olivier and Tim to draft a position regarding
extensibility of HTML and the role of the validator for
consideration by the TAG ACTION-7 [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action09">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action09</a>]<br />
<strong>[PENDING]</strong> <strong>ACTION:</strong> Henry S.
Thompson to Henry to prepare new draft of xmlFunctions-34
ACTION-26 [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action03">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action03</a>]<br />
<strong>[PENDING]</strong> <strong>ACTION:</strong> Henry S.
Thompson to revise URNsAndRegistries-50 finding in response to
F2F discussion [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action02">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action02</a>]<br />
 <br />
<strong>[DONE]</strong> <strong>ACTION:</strong> David Orchard to
explore the space of external registries and to post to the tag
member list. ACTION-32 [recorded in <a href=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action01">
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html#action01</a>]<br />
 <br />
[End of minutes]<br />
<hr />
<address>
Minutes formatted by David Booth's <a href=
"http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm">
scribe.perl</a> version 1.127 (<a href=
"http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/">CVS log</a>)<br />
$Date: 2007/09/21 22:19:38 $
</address>
<div class="diagnostics"></div>
</body>
</html>