W3C | TAG | Previous teleconference: 10 September 2009 | Next teleconference: 1 October 2009 (tentative).

TAG face-to-face meeting, 23-25 September 2009 — MIT Stata Center, Cambridge, MA, USA

Dan Connolly, Ashok Malhotra, Tim Berners-Lee, Larry Masinter, Henry Thompson, Jonathan Rees, John Kemp, Noah Mendelsohn

Agenda Summary

Logistics

Agenda Details

1. Convene

   Goals:

   • Appoint scribes
   • Review F2F logistics
   • Approve minutes of telconferences
     • Minutes of 10 Sept
2. Review F2F Goals and Agenda

   Session shepherd:

   Noah Mendelsohn

   Session goals:

   • Review F2F Goals
     • Discuss the HTML 5 working drafts, and make plan for providing feedback to the working group
     • Make progress on the Architecture of the Web of Applications
     • Discuss issues relating to metadata on the Web
     • Discuss TAG participation in the November W3C Technical Plenary and AC Meeting (TPAC) (Draft Plenary Day Agenda)
     • Make progress on selected other issues (URNsAndRegistries, etc.)
   • Review F2F Agenda (this document). Questions:
     • Do we want a separate session on JavaScript security?
     • Do we want a separate session on WebSockets? It's currently scheduled under W3C Work on Web APIs.

   Preparation:

   • June 2009 F2F discussion of TAG priorities and future work including:
     • Note with outline of priorities — these were collected at the wrapup session in June, and have some cross-references to then-current actions.
     • Proposed Table of Contents for TAG work on Web Architecture for Web Applications — these also were prepared at the June F2F; revised version for discussion at this F2F per ACTION-284).
   • (older) list of 6 proposed TAG priorities — recorded from whiteboard and flip charts at March 2009 TAG F2F
3. ISSUE-54 HTML

   Goals:

   • Decide how the TAG can best contribute to the success of HTML 5 and related technologies
   • Discuss specific technical and editorial issues with the HTML 5 working draft
   • Assign responsibilities for preparing feedback (if any) to HTML working group
   • Decide whether the TAG wishes to review Ian Hickson's experimental draft of an HTML 5 authoring specification
   • Discuss possible TAG support of HTML discussions at the November W3C Technical Plenary and AC Meeting (TPAC) (Draft Plenary Day Agenda)

   Background:

   • HTML WG chairs report (informally) that HTML working group may try to go to Last Call in autumn, 2009
   • W3C announcement (July 2009): XHTML 2 Working Group Expected to Stop Work End of 2009, W3C to Increase Resources on HTML 5
   • TAG chair call for TAG members to itemize potential issues with HTML 5 drafts
   • Division of labour for TAG reading the HTML 5 draft specification that we agreed to on July 23
   • Ian Hickson announces availability of initial drafts of HTML 5 authoring specifications. This is, in part, in response to a suggestion made by Noah in October 2008, shortly after the HTML/TAG joint working group meeting at the Mandelieu Technical Plenary.

   Preparation:

   • Noah's preliminary list of potential issues for consideration (late addition to agenda - email)
   • Ashok's list of potential issues for consideration
   • John Kemp's list of potential issues for consideration
   • Henry Thompson's raw notes through end of Section 2.4
   • Minutes of recent discussions on 3 September 2009 and 10 September 2009
   • Ian Hickson's experimental draft of an HTML 5 authoring specification (please skim this — we'll decide at the meeting whether to review it more thoroughly)
4. Architecture of Web Applications

   Session shepherd:

   Noah Mendelsohn (or maybe Jonathan?)

   Background:

   • The TAG agreed at the June 2009 F2F that Architecture of Web Applications would be a key focus area for the TAG.
   • Proposed Table of Contents for TAG work on Web Architecture for Web Applications.
   • ACTION-284 on Jonathan: Flesh out the Web Application [http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/06/webAppsTOC.html] outline with as many sentences as he can - now due 15 Sept 2009
   • ISSUE-60: Web Application State Management
   • First Public Working Draft titled Usage Patterns For Client-Side URI parameters

   Session goals:

   • Decide what the TAG wants to do regarding Architecture of Web Applications (pursue individual issues, work toward new volume of AWWW, etc.)
   • Technical discussion of selected issues from the "Table of Contents" (note that some, like APIs, are explicitly scheduled in this agenda, but we may decide to discuss others as well)

   Preparation:

   • Proposed Table of Contents for TAG work on Web Architecture for Web Applications: June version; revised version prepared by Jonathan for discussion at this F2F (per ACTION-284).
5. W3C Work on Web APIs

   Session shepherds:

   Ashok Malhotra, John Kemp

   Background:

   Traditionally, most of the W3C's Recommendations have focused on data formats such as HTML, identification mechanisms such as URI's, etc. With the rise of AJAX, JavaScript and similar APIs have become an increasingly important aspect of content and application development for the Web, and W3C is considering at least one proposal to charter work on the standardization of such APIs. The TAG has also had some informal discussionts (see thread starting with email from Thomas Roessler) of Geolocation APIs and the Geopriv work.

   The TAG discussed issues relating to APIs at it's June 2009 F2F; this will be a followup to tha tdiscussion.

   Session goals:

   • Discuss technical and architectural issues relating to Web APIs.
   • Decide:
     • Whether there are technical issues relating to APIs that merit ongoing consideration by the TAG
     • Decide whether the TAG should play a role in helping the W3C to decide whether to undertake work in this area, and/or how to structure charters for such work
     • Consider privacy and security issues relating to Javascript APIs that give access to the user's location.

   Open Actions relating to this topic

   • ACTION-273: (on Ashok) Carry forward framing issues around Archicture of APIs, with help from JK and LM.
   • ACTION-295: (on Dan) Monitor geolocation response to IETF GEOPRIV comments on last call and report to the TAG - Due: 2009-09-10
   • ACTION-300 (on John) Prepare draft on device APIs - Due: 2009-09-15
   • ACTION-301 (on John) Review websocket protocol/api motivation and brief TAG at Sep ftf - Due: 2009-09-15

   Preparation:

   • ACTION-273: (on Ashok) Carry forward framing issues around Archicture of APIs, with help from JK and LM.
   • In conjunction with ACTION-300, John Kemp has prepared a draft apis-on-the-web.
   • In conjunction with ACTION-301, John Kemp has prepared a briefing on the WebSocket protocol and API (should this be in a different session?).
   • (older - prepared for June F2F) W3C and APIs from Larry Masinter and Ashok Malhotra (announcement email)
   • Email geolocation update from Thomas Roessler.
   • Proposed HTML 5 2D graphics context for use with the canvas element
6. JavaScript Security

   This topic is currently not scheduled, but it seems important and fits under the umbrella of "Architecture of Web Applications". I will leave this here and poll the TAG on whether to schedule it. In the meantime, the following agenda text is carried forward from the June F2F agenda. [Noah]

   Session shepherd:

   Jonathan Rees

   Background:

   • The TAG recently discussed JavaScript technologies such as Caja, which apply capability-based sandboxing techniques to JavaScript. The goal is to support the "safe" execution of untrusted JavaScript code in a Web page.
   • The chair does not believe that we currently have an open issue that would provide for continued work in this area.
   • ACTION-274: See if I can reconstruct a discussion with tlr where present course and speed will lead to GET-based links becoming regarded as unsafe - on Dan Connolly. This is marked PENDING REVIEW, and it appears that no followup on unsafe GET is planned.

   Session goals:

   • Clarify significant use cases for safe execution of untrusted code in Web pages (I.e. remind ourselves why we care).
   • Further educate the TAG regarding technical work and standardization efforts relating to safe execution of untrusted code in Web pages.
   • Decide whether the TAG has a continued interest in working in this area, and if so, with what goals.
   • Open an issue and assign a shepherd, if appropriate.

   Preparation:

   • Resource protection (Jonathan's F2F preparation notes)
   • Paragraph on "Chattiness" in Mark Nottingham's review of CORS
   • Origin isn't (Tyler Close blog post)
   • Re: The HTTP Origin Header (draft-abarth-origin) (Roy Fielding email)
   • (optional, longish) ACLs don't (paper by Tyler Close)
   • (optional, long) Cross-origin resource sharing W3C working draft
7. Metadata Access and Formats

   Session shepherds:

   Ashok Malhotra (metadata access), Jonathan Rees (metadata formats and ontologies)

   Background:

   • We agreed at the June F2F that we would make Metadata one of our three main focus areas for the TAG.

   TAG Issues relating to this discussion:

   • ISSUE-57 (HttpRedirections-57) The use of HTTP Redirection — shepherd: Jonathan Rees
   • ISSUE-62 (UniformAccessToMetadata-62) — shepherd: Ashok Malhotra (this issue was "split" from issue-57 at the March 2009 TAG F2F meeting.)
   • ISSUE-63 (MetadataFramework-63) Metadata on the web: representations and ontologies? — shepherd: Larry Masinter (ACTION-254 calls for Larry to announce creation of this issue on www-tag.)

   TAG Issues Actions to this discussion:

   • ACTION-278 (on Jonathan) Draft changes to 2.7 of Metadata in URIs to cover the "Google Calendar" case, Due: 2009-09-30 (after F2F)
   • ACTION-281 (on Ashok) open Keep an eye on progress of link header draft, report to TAG, warn us of problems (ISSUE-62) Ashok Malhotra Due: 2009-08-01
   • ACTION-282 Jonathan Rees to draft a finding on metadata architecture. -- due 2009-08-31 -- CLOSED

   Goals:

   • Technical discussion of issues relating to metadata.
   • Decide TAG next steps on metadata.

   Preparation (Metadata access):

   • Jonathan Rees e-mail discussing LRDD
   • http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hammer-discovery-03
   • http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-site-meta-01
   • http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-05
   • (optional — late submission) Steven Rowat asks that the TAG consider his email with Ten Use-Cases of Individual Content Authors Requiring Rights/Commerce Metadata: success in HTML4; HTML5; and CCN; this is to some degree a plea to consider the positive characteristics of content-centric networks (Van Jacobson video).

   Preparation (Metadata formats):

   • Email from Ashok (member only) outlining perceived interests and concerns of various TAG members. Response from Raman. (The chair suggests that copies of this correspondence be moved to the TAG's public [email protected] archive.)
8. Content-type Sniffing

   Session shepherd:

   Dan Connolly (unconfirmed)

   • Background:
     • Lisa Dusseault and Mark Nottingham will be joining us by phone
     • TAG Finding Authoritative Metadata (12 April 2006)
     • Dan Connolly suggests that we discuss the draft Content-Type Processing Model, by Ian Hickson and Adam Barth; the draft proposes interoperable rules for Content-type "sniffing" in browsers. Note that the draft acknowledges at one point that it is in "... willful violation of the HTTP specification. [RFC2616]".
     • 13 August 2009 TAG telectonference Discussion on issue contentTypeOverride-24
     • ACTION-257 on Noah Mendelsohn: Schedule TAG to revisit progress in IETF/HTML liaison on content sniffing (invite Mark Not or Lisa D?) - PENDING REVIEW
     • ACTION-261 on Larry Masinter: Followup with Mark Nottingham and Lisa D. regarding Adam Barth's sniffing draft - CLOSED
   • Background (older):
     • 16 April 2009 TAG teleconference discussion of content type override and the Internet Draft cited above. We agreed to pick up discussion on a telcon within the next few weeks.
     • Larry Masinter email pointing to Minutes from the IETF/HTML liaison meeting in March, including discussion of content sniffing.
   • Goals:
     • Discuss issues of shared interest between IETF and W3C relating to Content-type sniffing
     • Consider possible need for revisions to TAG Finding Authoritative Metadata
9. Naming Schemes

   Session shepherd:

   Henry Thompson

   TAG Issues relating to this discussion:

   • ISSUE-50 (URNsAndRegistries-50): URIs, URNs, "location independent" naming systems and associated registries for naming on the Web - shepherd: Henry Thompson
   • May also be related to ISSUE-49 (schemeProtocols-49): Relationship of URI schemes to protocols and operations - no shepherd assigned

   TAG Actions relating to this discussion:

   • ISSUE-33 revise naming challenges story in response to Dec 2008 F2F discussion

   Goals:

   • Make sure we agree on target audience, success criteria, etc. for this work.
   • Review the new Dirk and Nadia draft
   • Consider whether this work should be better coordinated with, e.g., ISSUE-49.
   • Decide on next steps.

   Preparation:

   • June 2009 draft of Dirk and Nadia design a naming scheme (a new draft is promised within the next few days — this agenda will be updated with a pointer to the new copy when available)
   • (older - optional) John Kemp email (member-only) pointing to Widget URIs Editor's Draft
   • (older - optional) Widgets 1.0: URI Scheme W3C First Public Working Draft 18 June 2009
10. TAG Priorities

    Session shepherd:

    Noah Mendelsohn

    Background:

    • TAG agreed at June 2009 F2F to establish three key priorities for the TAG:
      1. HTML
      2. Architecture of Web Applications
      3. Metadata
      We also agreed that we would continue to work on some other issues, but with lower priority.
    • (older) Summary of potential priority work areas gathered on flip charts at the end of the March F2F
    • (older)Emails from the chair:
      • summary of materials relating to TAG priorities
      • request that the next round of discussions of goals and priorities be done using email (response from Tim).

    Preparation:

    • June 2009 F2F discussion of TAG priorities and future work including:
      • Note with outline of priorities — these were collected at the wrapup session in June, and have some cross-references to then-current actions.
      • Proposed Table of Contents for TAG work on Web Architecture for Web Applications — these also were prepared at the June F2F. (See also ACTION-284 on Jonathan: Flesh out the Web Application [http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/06/webAppsTOC.html] outline with as many sentences as he can - now due 15 Sept 2009)
    • (older) list of 6 proposed TAG priorities — recorded from whiteboard and flip charts at March 2009 TAG F2F
11. TAG Administration

    Goals:

    • Discuss dates for future F2F meetings
    • Consider logistics of TAG particiation in the November W3C Technical Plenary and AC Meeting (TPAC)
    • Discuss summer teleconference scheduling

    Background:

    • Future TAG meetings already scheduled:
      • 2-6 November 2006 @ W3C Technical Plenary, Santa Clara, CA. Note regrets from:
        • John Kemp
        • Jonathan Rees
      • 8-10 December 2009 @ MIT (Per resolution of 25 June 2009 - note that Raman and John Kemp have confirmed the acceptability of this date, though Raman is unsure he'll attend).
      • Suggestion that we co-locate TAG meeting with IETF meeting in Anaheim, 21-26 March 2010 (email from Larry and response from Noah — both W3C member-only). Discussed briefly on 6 August 2009.
    • Note that the spring meeting would traditionally be after new members have been elected. TAG members whose terms end in January 2010 are:
      • Ashok Malhotra
      • Noah Mendelsohn (co-chair — appointed)
      • Jonathan Rees (appointed)
      • Henry Thompson