What commonality should there be among W3C media types?
agreed
request
No reply from reviewer
nsMediaType-3

Relationship between media types and namespaces?
subsumed
mixedNamespaceMeaning-13
request
xformsReview-4
Request to review XForms Last Call document
declined
request
No reply from reviewer
uncefactLiaison-5

Invitation to create liaison with UN/CEFACT ebTWG
Architecture Group
declined
request
No reply from reviewer
rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
Algorithm for creating a URI from a QName?
agreed
request
Agreement
whenToUseGet-7

(1) GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms
(2) How to handle safe queries (New POST-like method?
GET plus a body?)
accepted
request
No response to reviewer
namespaceDocument-8

What should a "namespace document" look like?
no decision
(accepted)
request
HT
proposal
NW proposal
DC
proposal
uriMediaType-9
Why does the Web use mime types and not URIs?
agreed
request
No reply from reviewer
xmlSW-10

Should next version of XML be XML 1.0 - DTDs +
namespaces + xml:base + the infoset?
declined
request
No reply from reviewer
soapRPCURI-11

What is the appropriate relationship between SOAP RPC
and the Web's reliance on URIs?
declined
request
No reply from reviewer
xmlAsText-12

Do proposed changes to XML 1.1 ignore Unicode
constraints?
declined
request
No reply from reviewer
mixedNamespaceMeaning-13

What is the meaning of a document composed of content in
mixed namespaces?
subsumed
mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
xmlFunctions-34
RDFinXHTML-35
request
httpRange-14

What is the range of the HTTP dereference function?
agreed
request
RL
proposal
No reply from reviewer
URIEquivalence-15

When are two URI variants considered equivalent?
agreed
request
Agreement
HTTPSubstrate-16

Should HTTP be used as a substrate protocol? Does W3C
agree with RFC 3205?
no decision
(deferred)
request
charmodReview-17

Request to review "Character Model for the
Web" Last Call document
agreed
request
No reply from reviewer
qnameAsId-18
Is it ok to use Qnames as Identifiers?
agreed
request
Agreement
formattingProperties-19

Reuse existing formatting properties/names, coordinate
new ones
agreed
request
No reply from reviewer
errorHandling-20

What should specifications say about error handling?
agreed
request
Agreement
RFC3023Charset-21

Do all "shoulds" of RFC 3023 section 7.1
apply?
agreed
request
No reply from reviewer
augmentedInfoset-22
Infoset augmentation outside of PSVI?
agreed
request
Agreement
xlinkScope-23
What is the scope of using XLink?
agreed
request
No response to reviewer
contentTypeOverride-24

Can a specification include rules for overriding HTTP
content type parameters?
agreed
request
Agreement
deepLinking-25

What to say in defense of principle that deep linking is
not an illegal act?
agreed
request
Agreement
contentPresentation-26

Separation of semantic and presentational markup, to the
extent possible, is architecturally sound.
agreed
request
No response to reviewer
IRIEverywhere-27

Should W3C specifications start promoting IRIs?
no decision
(accepted)
request
TBL
proposal
fragmentInXML-28
Use of fragment identifiers in XML
agreed
request
No response to reviewer
xmlProfiles-29

When, whither and how to profile W3C specifications in
the XML Family
agreed
request
No reply from reviewer
binaryXML-30
Standardize a "binary XML" format?
no decision
(deferred)
request
metadataInURI-31

Should metadata (e.g., versioning information) be
encoded in URIs?
agreed
request
No reply from reviewer
xmlIDSemantics-32

How should the problem of identifying ID semantics in
XML languages be addressed in the absence of a DTD?
agreed
request
No response to reviewer
mixedUIXMLNamespace-33

Composability for user interface-oriented XML namespaces
no decision
(deferred)
request
xmlFunctions-34

XML Transformation and composability (e.g., XSLT,
XInclude, Encryption)
no decision
(accepted)
request
TVR
proposal
HT
proposal
RDFinXHTML-35

Syntax and semantics for embedding RDF in XHTML
no decision
(deferred)
request
DC
proposal
siteData-36

Web site metadata improving on robots.txt, w3c/p3p and
favicon etc.
no decision
(accepted)
request
abstractComponentRefs-37

Definition of abstract components with namespace names
and frag ids
no decision
(accepted)
request
putMediaType-38

Relation of HTTP PUT to GET, and whether client headers
to server are authoritative
agreed
request
No reply from reviewer
rdfURIMeaning-39
Meaning of URIs in RDF documents
no decision
(accepted)
request
URIGoodPractice-40
What are good practices for URI construction?
no decision
(accepted)
request
XMLVersioning-41

What are good practices for designing extensible XML
languages and for handling versioning?
no decision
(accepted)
request
DC
proposal
NM
proposal
NM
proposal
ultimateQuestion-42

What is the answer to life, the universe, and
everything.
no decision
(accepted)
request
NM
proposal
NM
proposal
DerivedResources-43
How are secondary resources derived?
no decision
(accepted)
request
xmlChunk-44
Chunk of XML - Canonicalization and equality
agreed
request
No reply from reviewer
mediaTypeManagement-45

What is the appropriate level of granularity of the
media type mechanism?
no decision
(accepted)
request
xml11Names-46

Impact of changes to XML 1.1 on other XML Specifications
no decision
(accepted)
request
endPointRefs-47

WS-Addressing SOAP binding & app protocols
no decision
(accepted)
request
nameSpaceState-48
Adding terms to a namespace
agreed
request
No reply from reviewer
schemeProtocols-49

Relationship of URI schemes to protocols and operations
no decision
(accepted)
request
URNsAndRegistries-50
URIs, URNs, "location independent" naming systems and associated registries for naming on the Web
no decision
(accepted)
request
DO
proposal
HT
proposal
standardizedFieldValues-51

Squatting on link relationship names, x-tokens,
registries, and URI-based extensibility
no decision
(accepted)
request
passwordsInTheClear-52
Sending passwords in the clear
no decision
(accepted)
request
genericResources-53
Generic resources
agreed
request
No reply from reviewer
TagSoupIntegration-54
Tag soup integration
no decision
(accepted)
request
utf7Encoding-55
Security issues with incorrect metadata
no decision
(accepted)
request
abbreviatedURIs-56
Abbreviating URIs in Web Languages
no decision
(accepted)
request
SW proposal
State description
Raised
Initial state; The group has not accepted the issue yet.
Accepted
Initial state; The group has agreed to address the issue.
Deferred
The Group has not reached a decision on this issue, but does
not intend to work on it further without new input.
agreed
The Group has made a decision and decided to follow the
suggestion.
Declined
The Group has decided not to address this issue.
Moved
The issue was moved in an other group. The Group does not
intent to resolve this issue.
Subsumed
The issue has been subsumed by an other issue. A link to the
other issue is given.
Decision cycle description
Announced
Initial decision cycle; The group has announced his decision.
Agreement
The group received an agreement to refine his decision.
Proposal
The group received a proposal to refine his decision.
Objection
The group received an objection to his decision.
Accepted
The group reopened an issue to reconsider his decision after received an objection
or proposal. A link to the new issue is given.
Maintained
The group maintained its decision after received an objection
or proposal.
Categories description
Issue details
w3cMediaType-1
: Should W3C WGs define their own media types? [
link to this issue
What are the general guidelines or policies
(if any) for W3C working groups in defining
their own media types? Should they be
defining them at all?
Request
concerning
W3C Data Formats
Discussion history
22 Apr 2002
29 Apr 2002
20 May 2002
17 Jun 2002
8 Jul 2002
25 Jul 2006
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 9 Jan 2002 by
Mark Baker
, on behalf of
XML Protocol WG
accepted
on 21 Jan 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Tim Bray comments on the
architecture doc
about namespaces and media types.
Message from Joseph Reagle about
three bits on MediaTypes and
IANA
Comments from Mark Baker on
XSLT and namespace dispatch
Forward from Simon St. Laurent
about ID: MediaFeature xmlns
Heads-up from Mark Nottingham
about XForms document in last call
and relation to media types issues.
How to Register an IANA Media
Type
, Joseph Reagle
18 Dec 2004:
IETF approves new media type
registration process
25 Feb 2004:
New registration process
description
from Martin Duerst
customMediaType-2
What commonality should there be among W3C media types?
link to this issue
For example, should all these custom XML
types being registered be required to use
the RFC 3023 +xml convention? If so, should
all the SHOULDs of section 7.1 be followed?
etc.. The question isn't restricted to RFC
3023 issues though. There may be value to
other common features between types.
Request
concerning
W3C Data Formats
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 9 Jan 2002 by
Mark Baker
, on behalf of
XML Protocol WG
accepted
on 21 Jan 2002
agreed
on 3 Jun 2002
See resolution for
w3cMediaType-1
. See
changes from Chris Lilley regarding RFC
3023
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 3 Jun 2002
nsMediaType-3
Relationship between media types and namespaces?
link to this issue
What is, or what should be, the relationship
between a media type and an XML namespace?
Request
concerning
Namespaces in XML
RFC3023
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 9 Jan 2002 by
Mark Baker
, on behalf of
XML Protocol WG
accepted
on 21 Jan 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
ID: xmlns Media Feature Tag
message from Larry Masinter
See
TB's proposal
Subsumed
by issue(s)
mixedNamespaceMeaning-13
on 22 Apr 2002
Cf. issue
mixedNamespaceMeaning-13
xformsReview-4
: Request to review XForms Last Call document [
link to this issue
Broad request to review XForms Last Call
document.
Request
concerning
XForms 1.0
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 18 Jan 2002 by
Art Barstow
, on behalf of
XForms WG
declined
on 28 Jan 2002
In general, the TAG does not expect to
review documents on the W3C Recommendation
Track, unless specific issues are brought to
their attention.
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 28 Jan 2002
uncefactLiaison-5
Invitation to create liaison with UN/CEFACT ebTWG
Architecture Group
link to this issue
There are several architectural issues in
UN/CEFACT and ebXML which should probably be
solved by the W3C group. The needs are not
specific to ebXML and several other
"Registry" and XML vocabulary
groups may have similar requirements.
Request
concerning
UN/CEFACT
ebXML
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 3 Jan 2002 by
Duane Nickull
, on behalf of
UN/CEFACT ebTWG Architecture Group
declined
on 8 Feb 2002
TAG suggests that request be redirected to
new Web Services Architecture Working Group
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 8 Feb 2002
rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
: Algorithm for creating a URI from a QName? [
link to this issue
"It seems to me that the RDFCore and
XMLSchema WGs (at the very least) ought to
develop a common, reasonably acceptable
convention as to the mapping between QNames
and URIs. Perhaps this is an issue that the
TAG ought to consider (because it is a
really basic architectural issue)."
Request
concerning
RDF Model Theory
XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes
Discussion history
5 May 2002
24 Sep 2002
25 Nov 2002
6 Feb 2003
23 Jun 2003
15 Nov 2003
5 Dec 2002
5 Jan 2004
26 Jan 2004
9 Feb 2004
2 Mar 2004
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 22 Jan 2002 by
Jonathan Borden
accepted
on 29 Jan 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
URIs for terms: motivation [was:
Requirements Document]
Discussion started by TB
Thread within XML Schema WG
rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6 affects
WSDL too
from DanC. See input from Jonathan
Marsh (
forwarded by Paul Cotton
agreed
on 15 Nov 2003
The use of Qnames as identifiers without
providing a mapping to URIs is inconsistent
with Web Architecture. See the TAG finding
Using Qualified Names (QNames) as
Identifiers in Content
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 2 Dec 2003
agreement by reviewer on 16 Dec 2003
Accepts the situation
Action history
DC
accepted on 6 Feb 2003
Propose TAG response to XML Schema
desideratum (
RQ-23
dropped on 4 Dec 2003
Henry Thompson is aware of this
issue.
NW
accepted on 6 Oct 2003
Revise Qname finding to say (1) if
you use qnames, provide a mapping to
URIs and (2) don't define an
attribute that can take either a URI
or a Qname since they are not
syntactically distinguishable.
proposal on 4 Nov 2003
Proposed revision of finding.
However, as discussed at
5 Jan 2004 teleconf
, NW expects to produce a new
revision based on other input.
subsumed on 12 Jan 2004
Subsumed by action for revision
related to
qnameAsId-18
DO
accepted on 15 Nov 2003
Point WSDL WG to resolution of issue
6.
completed on 15 Nov 2003
DO
accepted on 15 Nov 2003
Propose some extra text for section
4.5 that hypertext agents often
follow an IGNORE rule and this often
results in incompatible behavior.
Ignore applied to fragid
interpretation.
dropped on 5 Jan 2004
This was too late for Last Call Arch
Doc.
whenToUseGet-7
(1) GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms
(2) How to handle safe queries (New POST-like method?
GET plus a body?)
link to this issue
See
comments from Paul Prescod
to
Forms WG
"I know you've recently been asked
about PUT. During that discussion it arose
that HTTP GET is deprecated in the
specification. Does this mean that XForms
would be incompatible with an application
like Google that uses a form to generate a
GET URL?"
Request
concerning
XForms 1.0
Design Issues
Discussion history
4 Feb 2002
8 Apr 2002
15 Apr 2002
22 Apr 2002
29 Apr 2002
5 May 2002
20 May 2002
3 Jun 2002
10 Jun 2002
8 Jul 2002
25 Nov 2002
6 Feb 2003
5 May 2003
23 Jun 2003
7 Jul 2003
15 Sep 2003
8 Oct 2003
5 Dec 2002
5 Jan 2004
9 Feb 2004
2 Mar 2004
10 Oct 2006
17 Oct 2006
24 Oct 2006
11 Dec 2006
11 Dec 2006
9 Jan 2007
26 Feb 2007
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 23 Jan 2002 by
Dan Connolly
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 29 Jan 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Background information from
Micha Dubinko
Martin Duerst comments
on using GET with a message body.
Draft SOAP HTTP GET binding
(DO)
Additional comments from Dan
Connolly
regarding some security issues (to
TAG).
See
comments from Noah
, however.
WS-Transfer and HTTP, re TAG
Issues whenToUseGet-7 &
endPointRefs-47
agreed
on 25 Nov 2002
URIs, Addressability, and the use of
HTTP GET
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 22 Sep 2003
agreement by reviewer on 22 Sep 2003
Acknowledged by DanC by virtue of WG
agreement
raised
on 10 Oct 2006
Reopening the issue as an umbrella (together
with issue
endPointRefs-47
) for discussing
submission WS-Transfer
Acknowledgment cycle
Not started
accepted
on 10 Oct 2006
Acknowledgment cycle
Not started
Action history
DC
accepted on 15 Sep 2003
Provide TAG with pointers into WS
specs where issue of safe operations
is manifest.
completed on 2 Mar 2004
See WSDL WG's
issue 117
DO
accepted on 15 Sep 2003
Ask WSDL WG to look at finding; ask
them if marking operations as safe
in WSDL is one of their
requirements.
proposal on 3 Dec 2003
Request to WS Desc WG Chair to
ensure that this on their WG's
issues list.
completed on 2 Mar 2004
See WSDL WG's
issue 117
and
decision from WSDL WG
SW
accepted on 26 Apr 2004
Thank the WSDL for what they've done
so far, ask them to explain a bit
about what can go wrong, encourage
them to put it in the test suite
proposal on 11 May 2004
See email to WSDL WG
completed on 24 May 2004
Completed
NM
accepted on 11 Dec 2006
Noah and Dave to write a position
paper outline for the TAG by the
18th of Dec. 2006.
completed on 19 Dec 2006
Completed
SW
accepted on 26 Feb 2007
Stuart to respond to Jacek and
Jonathan wrt whenToUseGet-7 and
WSDL.
completed on 27 Feb 2007
namespaceDocument-8
What should a "namespace document" look like?
link to this issue
The
section on namespaces
in
Web Architecture from 50,000 feet
states: "The namespace document (with
the namespace URI) is a place for the
language publisher to keep definitive
material about a namespace. Schema languages
are ideal for this." Tim Bray
disagrees.
Request
concerning
Web Architecture from 50,000 feet
Discussion history
25 Mar 2002
1 Apr 2002
8 Apr 2002
5 May 2002
24 Sep 2002
25 Sep 2002
18 Nov 2002
9 Dec 2002
16 Dec 2002
6 Jan 2003
13 Jan 2003
6 Feb 2003
17 Feb 2003
24 Feb 2003
24 Mar 2003
7 Apr 2003
14 Apr 2003
23 Jun 2003
8 Sep 2003
15 Sep 2003
5 Dec 2002
26 Jan 2004
2 Mar 2004
14 May 2004
5 Apr 2005
16 Jun 2005
12 Jul 2005
30 Aug 2005
22 Sep 2005
11 Oct 2005
1 Nov 2005
8 Nov 2005
6 Dec 2005
10 Jan 2006
21 Feb 2006
2 May 2006
14 Jun 2006
5 Oct 2006
14 Nov 2006
13 Dec 2006
6 Mar 2007
Transition history
raised
on 14 Jan 2002 by
Tim Bray
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 4 Feb 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
XML Schema Part 1: Structures
See
comments from Patrick Stickler
that "namespaces are strictly
punctuation." and
reply from Larry Masinter
See
14 Theses
from Tim Bray
See
thread on RDF and RDDL
from Stuart Williams.
See
RDF in HTML
from Tim Berners-Lee
Emails (
) from James Clark to xml-dev about
schemas, as
suggested by Tim Bray
. See also
Email from James about Relax NG
and W3C XML Schema
Guidelines for the Use of XML
within IETF Protocols
, section 4.9. See also
ietf-xml-use mailing list
in case the document disappears.
RDDL Challenge
RDDL Proposal from Tim Bray
RDDL Proposal from Chris Wilper
RDDL Proposal from Jonathan
Borden
Examples of RDDL in RDF
from TBL
RDDL Proposal from Micah Dubinko
RDDL proposal from Sandro Hawke
Summary by Norm
of RDDL Proposals.
RDDL Proposal from Garrett
Wilson
1 Jun 2003 draft of RDDL
Namespace URIs should be
dereferencable (to find useful
explanatory material) (
12 Feb ftf meeting
Refer to draft TAG
opinion from Tim Bray
on the use of URNs for namespace
names.
RDDL2 Background
from Tim Bray.
grokRDDL.xsl mapping to RDF
from Dan Connolly.
namespaceDocument-8 Notes
from Norm Walsh (24 June 2005)
Associating Resources with
Namespaces
from Norm Walsh
Gleaning Resource Descriptions
from Dialects of Languages
(GRDDL)
Action history
PC
accepted on 7 Apr 2003
Prepare finding to answer this
issue, pointing to the RDDL Note.
See
comments from Paul
regarding TB theses. Per
23 Feb 2004 teleconf
, modified into an action to produce
a bulleted list of points.
dropped on 10 Jan 2006
TB
accepted on 15 Sep 2003
Add "Hello World" example to next
draft of RDDL Spec (i.e., to edited
version of
RDDL draft 4
). See also
Proposal for RDDL to RDF mapping
from DC
completed on 10 Jan 2006
TB
accepted on 15 Sep 2003
Produce schemaware for RDDL spec
once TAG has consensus on the
syntax.
dropped on 10 Jan 2006
TB
accepted on 23 Feb 2004
Continue working on draft and to get
statement from Jonathan re:
persistence at rddl.org
completed on 21 Feb 2006
TB
accepted on 23 Feb 2004
Add pointer to previous syntax in
the Note
dropped on 10 Jan 2006
NW
accepted on 12 Jul 2005
follow up on noah's
message
on ns name. Reconfirmed on
10 Jan 2006
dropped on 14 Nov 2006
DC
accepted on 30 Aug 2005
draft a section on using XHTML 1.x
(not RDDL) with GRDDL and relax-ng
completed on 7 Oct 2005
DanC has sent a note "a usps
namespace document using plain XHTML
and GRDDL".
HT
accepted on 6 Sep 2005
track progress of
#int bug 1974
in the XML Schema namespace document
in the XML Schema WG. Confirmed
5 Oct 2006
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-23
DC
accepted on 22 Sep 2005
ask for "default nature" to be
changed to "implicit nature" in RDDL
spec
completed on 10 Jan 2006
The RDDL spec
was fixed
NW
accepted on 10 Jan 2006
propose to Jonathan Borden that he
changes to using a file of Natures.
Confirmed on
14 Nov 2006
completed on 13 Dec 2006
NW
accepted on 13 Dec 2006
Provide a set of test cases of ways
in which RDDL is actually used.
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-21
DC
accepted on 13 Dec 2006
Start an ontology including
docns/documentElementNamespace.
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-22
uriMediaType-9
: Why does the Web use mime types and not URIs? [
link to this issue
Media types are not first-class objects on
the Web, or are they?
Request
concerning
General
Discussion history
8 Apr 2002
15 Apr 2002
22 Jul 2002
12 Aug 2002
30 Aug 2002
9 Dec 2002
6 Feb 2003
5 May 2003
23 Jun 2003
15 Dec 2003
14 May 2004
12 Jul 2005
Transition history
raised
on 17 Dec 2001 by
Aaron Swartz
accepted
on 4 Feb 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
RFC2046
Proposal by Don Eastlake:
draft-eastlake-cturi-03
and
commentary from Larry Masinter
Email from TBL to IETF
Response from Larry Masinter
Layout of MIME Media Types pages
IANA appears to have responded to
the spirit of this draft (see
email from Chris Lilley
).
XMLP WG request for revision of
uriMediaType-9 issue and related
finding
agreed
on 21 Oct 2002
TAG Finding: Mapping between URIs and
Internet Media Types
. The TAG has not resolved this issue since
the loop has not been closed with the IETF.
See Internet Draft
A Registry of Assignments using
Ubiquitous Technologies and Careful
Policies
by D. Connolly and M. Baker.
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 21 Oct 2002
Action history
CL
accepted on 5 May 2003
Propose CL's three changes to
registration process to Ned Freed.
proposal on 27 Oct 2003
See
Email to IANA Webmaster
completed on 14 May 2004
xmlSW-10
Should next version of XML be XML 1.0 - DTDs +
namespaces + xml:base + the infoset?
link to this issue
Should next version of XML be XML 1.0 - DTDs
+ namespaces + xml:base + the infoset?
Request
concerning
XML 1.0 Second Edition
XBase
XML Namespaces
XML Information set
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 6 Feb 2002 by
Tim Bray
, on behalf of
TAG
declined
on 12 Feb 2002
Forward this to the XML Coordination Group
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 12 Feb 2002
soapRPCURI-11
What is the appropriate relationship between SOAP RPC
and the Web's reliance on URIs?
link to this issue
What is the appropriate relationship between
SOAP RPC and the Web's reliance on URIs?
Request
concerning
SOAP 1.2
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 8 Feb 2002 by
Paul Prescod
declined
on 12 Feb 2002
Forward to XML Protocol WG
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 12 Feb 2002
xmlAsText-12
Do proposed changes to XML 1.1 ignore Unicode
constraints?
link to this issue
Do proposed changes to XML 1.1 ignore
Unicode constraints?
Request
concerning
XML 1.1
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 11 Feb 2002 by
Rick Jelliffe
declined
on 12 Feb 2002
XML Core WG is aware of these issues. Refer
to
draft response from David Orchard
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 12 Feb 2002
mixedNamespaceMeaning-13
What is the meaning of a document composed of content in
mixed namespaces?
link to this issue
This was raised in the light of lack of
consensus result from the workshop, and
specifically prompted by a question,
occurring as XEncryption made its way to
Candidate Recommendation status in W3C,
about the relationship of XEncryption to
other specs, and TAG discussion of XSLT
"templates" as an apparent corner
case in XML processing.
Second issue: namespace-based dispatching.
From TAG draft finding on issues *-{1,2,3},
the following draft text was removed for
discussion as part of this issue:
When processing XML documents, it is
appropriate for Web applications to dispatch
elements to modules for processing based on
the namespace of the element type.
Correct dispatching and processing requires
context - in general it is not reasonable
nor safe to do namespace-based processing
without knowledge of the namespace of
ancestor elements. Because of this, the
namespace of the root element of an XML
document has special status and serves
naturally as a basis for top-level software
dispatching in the case where the dispatch
information is not externally supplied.
It is acknowledged that there are exceptions
to this rule, for example XSLT documents
whose root element's namespace depends on
the desired output from application of the
XSLT.
It should be noticed that in the case of
certain sort of element including some in
XSLT, XInclude, XEncryption namespaces, that
a system conforming to the specification
will regcognize them at any point in a
document and elaborate them in place,
typically producing more XML which replaces
the element instance in the tree.
Request
concerning
XML
XSLT
Discussion history
11 Mar 2002
22 Apr 2002
5 May 2002
25 Sep 2002
6 Feb 2003
9 Feb 2004
5 Apr 2005
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 22 Apr 2002 by
Tim Berners-Lee
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 22 Apr 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Discussion by Tim Berners-Lee
Background of the XHTML Media
Types Note
from Masayasu Ishikawa
Subsumed
by issue(s)
mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
xmlFunctions-34
RDFinXHTML-35
on 6 Feb 2003
Split into three smaller issues:
mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
xmlFunctions-34
, and
RDFinXHTML-35
httpRange-14
What is the range of the HTTP dereference function?
link to this issue
TBL's argument the HTTP URIs (without
"#") should be understood as
referring to documents, not cars.
Request
concerning
HTTP
URI
Discussion history
1 Jul 2002
15 Jul 2002
22 Jul 2002
29 Jul 2002
16 Sep 2002
24 Sep 2002
6 Jan 2003
27 Jan 2003
6 Feb 2003
7 Jun 2003
23 Jun 2003
22 Jul 2003
28 Jul 2003
12 May 2004
7 Feb 2005
15 Mar 2005
29 Mar 2005
3 May 2005
31 May 2005
15 Jun 2005
27 Feb 2006
27 Feb 2006
26 Feb 2007
30 May 2007
31 May 2007
11 Jun 2007
18 Jun 2007
2 Jul 2007
Transition history
raised
on 25 Mar 2002 by
Tim Berners-Lee
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 6 Feb 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Axioms of Web Architecture
, by Tim Berners-Lee
What do HTTP URIs Identify?
by TimBL
History of Fragment Identifiers
by Roy Fielding.
Moby Dick example and summary
from TB.
Namespace v. Namespace Document is
an example of this issue as
evidenced by
this thread
See discussion of
information resources
See discussion of phrase "on
the Web" at
22 Jul 2003 teleconference
and subsequent threads
Summary and proposal from NW
GoodURIs
agreed
on 15 Jun 2005
The TAG provides advice to the community
that they may mint "http" URIs for any
resource provided that they follow this
simple rule for the sake of removing
ambiguity:
If an "http" resource responds to a
GET request with a 2xx response,
then the resource identified by that
URI is an information resource;
If an "http" resource responds to a
GET request with a 303 (See Other)
response, then the resource
identified by that URI could be any
resource;
If an "http" resource responds to a
GET request with a 4xx (error)
response, then the nature of the
resource is unknown.
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 18 Jun 2005
Action history
TBL
accepted on 13 May 2004
Write up a summary position to close
httpRange-14, text for document.s
proposal on 14 May 2004
Proposed text, resolution, new issue
dropped on 15 Jun 2005
RF
accepted on 13 May 2004
Write up a summary position to close
httpRange-14, text for document.s
proposal on 14 May 2004
Proposed text, resolution, new issue
dropped on 15 Jun 2005
RL
accepted on 26 Feb 2007
Rhys to consider and draft a finding
around the issues raised by
httpRange-14.
proposal on 27 May 2007
Email announcing first public draft
from Rhys
completed on 27 May 2007
RL
accepted on 11 Jun 2007
Rhys to revise Dereferencing HTTP
URIs finding in response to F2F
discussion. Continued:
9 July 2007
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-6
and to issue
HttpRedirections-57
SW
accepted on 11 Jun 2007
Stuart to review
"Cool URIs for the Semantic Web"
completed on 9 Jul 2007
Review posted to
www-tag
NW
accepted on 11 Jun 2007
Norm to review
"Cool URIs for the Semantic Web"
dropped on 9 Jul 2007
URIEquivalence-15
When are two URI variants considered equivalent?
link to this issue
From Joseph Reagle:
Stephen [Farrell] has asked an interesting
question below that I expect will be
important to any activity that uses URIs as
identifiers in the context of a
semantic/security application: when are two
URI variants considered identical?
Request
concerning
URI
XML Namespaces
Discussion history
22 Jul 2002
29 Jul 2002
30 Aug 2002
18 Nov 2002
16 Dec 2002
20 Jan 2003
7 Feb 2003
24 Mar 2003
31 Mar 2003
14 Apr 2003
28 Apr 2003
30 Jun 2003
5 Dec 2002
5 Jan 2004
2 Mar 2004
22 Mar 2004
14 May 2004
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 19 Feb 2002 by
Joseph Reagle
accepted
on 1 Apr 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
XML Namespaces
Internationalized Resource
Identifiers (IRI)
Character Model for the Web
, notably
Chapter 4
and
Chapter 8
Email from Misha Wolf
Input from Martin Duerst
on IRIs
See text from TimBL on
URI canonicalization
Assigned initially to Dan Connolly
(at
30 Aug 2002 teleconf
). See
Proposal from DanC
Email from Larry Masinter proposing
A simpler solution to %7e vs %7E
vs ~ in namespace comparison
Proposal from Noah M
to say "Hex-escapes aren't
allowed [in xml namespace names]
Don't use them."
Email from TBL about
Rationalizing the term URI
Email from Larry Masinter
about
URI BOF minutes from IETF56
agreed
on 14 Apr 2003
Draft finding:

URI Comparison
(link not maintained but see RFC3986).
. This has been integrated into RFC2396bis (
CVS repository
); the TAG expects to follow the progress of
RFC2396bis. Commentary and resolution should
happen through the IETF process.
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 14 Apr 2002
agreement by reviewer on 12 Dec 2002
Action history
SW
accepted on 30 Jun 2003
Track RFC2396bis where
Tim Bray text

has been integrated. Comment within
the IETF process.
proposal on 18 May 2004
SW believes RFC2396 largely
incorporates the necessary text; see
his email for details.
completed on 24 May 2004
TB's text successfully incorporated.
TBL
accepted on 5 Jan 2004
(due 2004-02-06)
Review RFC2396 bis (current Editor's
Draft) in preparation for IETF/W3C
coordination meeting 6 Feb.
completed on 22 Mar 2004
TBL reported that he sent comments
to RF about the RFC and Roy
acknowledged having received them.
HTTPSubstrate-16
Should HTTP be used as a substrate protocol? Does W3C
agree with RFC 3205?
link to this issue
From Mark Nottingham:
The IETF has recently published RFC3205,
"On the use of HTTP as a
Substrate" [1] as Best Current
Practice.
This document makes a number of
recommendations regarding the use of HTTP.
Some are reasonable, such as guidelines
about what kinds of scenarios the HTTP is
most useful in, how to use media types and
methods to extend the HTTP, etc. However, it
also bases a number of recommendations on a
fuzzily-defined concept of 'traditional use'
of the HTTP. These directives may seriously
limit the future potential of the Web,
effectively freezing its capability to
common practice in 2001."
Request
concerning
RFC3205
Discussion history
30 Jun 2003
12 May 2004
7 Feb 2005
21 Sep 2005
Transition history
raised
on 24 Mar 2002 by
Mark Nottingham
accepted
on 1 Apr 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Response from Randy Hall to IETF
Message from Roy Fielding
Propoposed criticsm of RFC3205
from TBL.
Email from Mark Baker
on tunneling as a property of the
application.
See
message from Larry Masinter
w.r.t. Web services.
deferred
on 12 May 2004
The TAG decided to defer this issue pending
any attempt to enforce RFC3205.
Action history
RF
accepted on 6 Feb 2003
Write a response to IESG asking
whether the Web services example in
the SOAP 1.2 primer is intended to
be excluded from RFC 3205
dropped on 12 May 2004
Closed as issue is deferred.
RF
accepted on 12 May 2003
Write descriptive paragraph
explaining this issue's state.
dropped on 10 Aug 2004
Roy reported on his discussion at
the IETF meeting.
charmodReview-17
Request to review "Character Model for the
Web" Last Call document
link to this issue
Request to review "Character Model for
the Web" Last Call document
Request
concerning
Character Model for the Web 1.0
Discussion history
3 Jun 2002
24 Jun 2002
14 Jul 2003
8 Sep 2003
8 Oct 2003
2 Feb 2004
15 Mar 2004
22 Mar 2004
Transition history
raised
on 16 Apr 2002 by
Misha Wolf
, on behalf of
I18N WG
accepted
on 29 Apr 2002
agreed
on 24 Jun 2002
Comments sent by Norm to the I18N
comments list
and
reminder from Dan Connolly
. See also
Comments from CL
. See other TAG resolutions regarding this
issue in
3 Jun minutes
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 24 Jun 2002
Action history
SW
accepted on 8 Oct 2003
Follow up with I18N folks on status
of TAG's charmod comments. See
Mail from DC to I18N WG in light
of new Charmod draft
proposal on 3 Nov 2003
SW has discussed this with new I18N
chair. SW invited I18N reps to
participate in a TAG teleconf,
probably in Dec 2003. At
15 March 2004 teleconf
, SW took an additional action to
request a two-week extension for TAG
comments.
completed on 22 Mar 2004
SW's action, by virtue of the TAG
agreeing to proposals from CL and
DC, seems to have been completed.
TB
accepted on 26 Jan 2004
Review charmod language re:
reference to Unicode std.
proposal on 4 Mar 2004
Review from Tim Bray
subsumed on 8 Jul 2004
CL
accepted on 26 Jan 2004
(due 2004-02-02)
Pull out items from I18N WG response
to TAG issues for meeting
discussion.
proposal on 2 Feb 2004
Summary of position on I18N WG
replies.
completed on 2 Feb 2004
CL to respond to I18N WG per his
proposal.
CL
accepted on 2 Feb 2004
Respond to I18N WG per previous
proposal.
completed on 22 Mar 2004
This action has been completed and
replaced by an action assigned 22
March.
DC
accepted on 26 Jan 2004
Look at
I18N issue C127
: "Say that the IRI form is used in
the document instance and the
hexified URI form when it goes over
the wire"
subsumed on 28 Jun 2004
CL
accepted on 22 Mar 2004
Suggest wording to I18N WG regarding
C068.
proposal on 29 Mar 2004
subsumed on 28 Jun 2004
CL
accepted on 22 Mar 2004
Write up TAG's complete LC comments
and send them to the I18N WG (cc'ing
www-tag).
proposal on 29 Mar 2004
subsumed on 28 Jun 2004
qnameAsId-18
: Is it ok to use Qnames as Identifiers? [
link to this issue
Is it ok to use Qnames as Identifiers?
Request
concerning
Namespaces in XML, section 3
Discussion history
20 May 2002
10 Jun 2002
17 Jun 2002
24 Jun 2002
15 Jul 2002
15 Dec 2003
12 Jan 2004
9 Feb 2004
23 Feb 2004
2 Mar 2004
15 Mar 2004
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 19 Apr 2002 by
Joseph Reagle
, on behalf of
XKMS WG
accepted
on 29 Apr 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
A radical finding on Using
Qualified Names (QNames) as
Identifiers in Content
from Norm Walsh
agreed
on 22 Jul 2002
Finding:
Using QNames as Identifiers
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 22 Jul 2002
agreement by reviewer on 12 Dec 2002
Action history
NW
accepted on 12 Jan 2004
Ask the Schema WG to review the
draft finding.
proposal on 27 Feb 2004
Ask the Schema WG to review the
draft finding.
completed on 15 Mar 2004
See revised finding
Using QNames as Identifiers
NW
accepted on 12 Jan 2004
Revise
6 Jan 2004 draft finding
for review and possible approval by
TAG.
proposal on 14 Jan 2004
27 Feb 2004 Draft
Additional revisions expected
per
23 Feb teleconf
Revised draft for 19 Jan
teleconf.
completed on 15 Mar 2004
See revised finding
Using QNames as Identifiers
DC
accepted on 26 Jan 2004
Review 14 Jan draft of
Qname Finding
dropped on 15 Mar 2004
Dropped and finding accepted.
TB
accepted on 26 Jan 2004
Review 14 Jan draft of
Qname Finding
dropped on 15 Mar 2004
Dropped and finding accepted.
TBL
accepted on 26 Jan 2004
Review 14 Jan draft of
Qname Finding
completed on 15 Mar 2004
TBL's comments taken into account
and finding accepted.
formattingProperties-19
Reuse existing formatting properties/names, coordinate
new ones
link to this issue
Reuse existing formatting properties/names,
coordinate new ones
Request
concerning
CSS3
Discussion history
17 Jun 2002
8 Jul 2002
15 Jul 2002
5 Dec 2002
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 8 May 2002 by
Steve Zilles
accepted
on 20 May 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
CSS2
XSLT
HTML CG Work
Proposed changes from Rick
Jeliffe
agreed
on 22 Jul 2002
Finding:
Consistency of Formatting Property
Names, Values, and Semantics
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 22 Jul 2002
errorHandling-20
What should specifications say about error handling?
link to this issue
What should specifications say about error
handling?
Request
concerning
W3C specifications
Discussion history
27 May 2002
3 Jun 2002
6 Feb 2003
30 Jun 2003
15 Nov 2003
5 Jan 2004
2 Mar 2004
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 22 May 2002 by
Rob Lanphier
accepted
on 3 Jun 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
QAWG issue 51
agreed
on 15 Nov 2003
The TAG believes it has addressed a majority
of points about the issue in the 11 Nov 2003
draft, with pointers to relevant sections
3.4 and 1.2.2, as well as the section on
versioning and extensibility. The TAG
declines at this time to handle the
following questions raised by the reviewer:
(1) Extension of XML. Answer: Application
dependent. (2) Handling of deprecated
elements.
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 2 Dec 2003
agreement by reviewer on 12 Dec 2003
Action history
CL
accepted on 15 Nov 2003
Write text to reviewer about the
TAG's decision on this issue.
proposal on 2 Dec 2003
Email sent to reviewer.
completed on 5 Jan 2004
See
reply from Rob Lanphier
RFC3023Charset-21
Do all "shoulds" of RFC 3023 section 7.1
apply?
link to this issue
Do all "shoulds" of RFC 3023
section 7.1 apply?
Request
concerning
W3C Data Formats
RFC3023
Discussion history
3 Jun 2002
26 Aug 2002
9 Sep 2002
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 9 Jan 2002 by
Mark Baker
, on behalf of
XML Protocol WG
accepted
on 3 Jun 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
This issue was split off from issue
w3cMediaType-1
agreed
on 7 Oct 2002
TAG Finding: Internet Media Type
registration, consistency of use
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 8 Oct 2003
augmentedInfoset-22
: Infoset augmentation outside of PSVI? [
link to this issue
So I recommend a TAG finding along the
following lines:
Type-augmented XML is a good thing
and a recommendation should be
prepared describing it both at the
infoset and syntax level. (I gather
there is already some work along
these lines in XML Schema?). Serious
consideration should be given to
80/20 points rather than simply
re-using the plethora of primitive
types from XML Schema.
Type-augmented XML has nothing to
say about default values created in
any schema.
Any software can create and/or use
type-augmented XML, whether or not
any validation is being performed.
Work on XQuery and other things that
require a Type-Augmented Infoset
must not depend on schema
processing, and should not have
normative linkages to any schema
language specifications.
Request
concerning
XML Schema Part 1: Structures
Discussion history
17 Jun 2002
8 Jul 2002
26 Aug 2002
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 12 Jun 2002 by
Tim Bray
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 17 Jun 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Email from Noah Mendelsohn
Email from Mary Holstege
Summary, proposals from Tim Bray
Proposal from Rick Jeliffe
Request from Tim Bray to
"unraise"
. See thread for pushback.
agreed
on 26 Aug 2002
For now, the TAG has decided the issue by
withdrawing it. From TB: "I learned
that while there are linkages between xquery
and xml schema, they are non-normative; you
can implement xquery with other schema
languages; so I don't see an architecture
issue at the moment. I submitted a large
comment to the xquery process that there
does remain too much intermingling with xml
schema that could easily go away. If the two
specs aren't made sufficiently independent,
I expect to come back to the TAG."
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 26 Aug 2002
agreement by reviewer on 26 Aug 2003
Acknowledged by TB by virtue of WG
agreement
xlinkScope-23
: What is the scope of using XLink? [
link to this issue
For me this questions depends on whether the
document type is a human-readable hypertext
document, when generic hypertext xml tools
would benefit from knowing what is a link,
and whether significance of the URI in
question is a hypertext link or something
different.
Request
concerning
XML Linking Language (XLINK)
Discussion history
17 Jun 2002
1 Jul 2002
26 Aug 2002
30 Aug 2002
16 Sep 2002
24 Sep 2002
7 Oct 2002
21 Oct 2002
11 Nov 2002
18 Nov 2002
16 Jan 2003
20 Jan 2003
6 Feb 2003
17 Mar 2003
30 Jun 2003
2 Mar 2003
14 May 2004
6 Oct 2004
7 Feb 2005
22 Mar 2005
21 Sep 2005
Transition history
raised
on 14 Jun 2002 by
Tim Berners-Lee
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 17 Jun 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Steven Pemberton (for HTML WG)
HLink Working Draft
(Member-only)
Background from Mimasa
(TAG-only)
SVG and non-XLink attributes
Tech arguments from Steven
Pemberton
Notes from 22 Oct 2002 XML CG
call
(Member-only).
When to use XLink
from TBL.
Summary of technical discussion
from Stuart Williams.
SkunkLink: a skunkworks XML
linking proposal
from Micah Dubinko
Summary of reqs
from Lloyd Rutledge.
Proposal for kind of xlink basic
from TB.
See
draft
, and
SW message
to CG chairs.
XML Linking Language (XLink)
Version 1.1
agreed
on 21 Sep 2005
Paragraph
4.5.2 of Web Architecture
closes the issue. See also draft of
XML Linking Language (XLink) Version 1.1
Acknowledgment cycle
Not started
Action history
CL
accepted on 30 Jun 2003
Ping the chairs of those groups
asking for an update on
xlinkScope-23.
proposal on 27 Oct 2003
Sent emails to chairs of HTML WG and
XML CG.
completed on 14 May 2004
contentTypeOverride-24
Can a specification include rules for overriding HTTP
content type parameters?
link to this issue
For me this questions depends on whether the
document type is a human-readable hypertext
document, when generic hypertext xml tools
would benefit from knowing what is a link,
and whether significance of the URI in
question is a hypertext link or something
different.
Maybe a compromise is to only allow the link
to specify the content-type when the server
is FTP (or something else with no
content-type control) or the HTTP server
returns text/plain or octet-steam, which
seem to be used for "don't know"
types.
Request
concerning
Speech Recognition Grammar Specification Version
1.0
HTTP/1.1
Discussion history
6 Feb 2003
24 Mar 2003
7 Apr 2003
5 May 2003
12 May 2003
16 Jun 2003
23 Jun 2003
30 Jun 2003
7 Jul 2003
8 Oct 2003
5 Dec 2002
15 Dec 2003
26 Jan 2004
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 14 Jun 2002 by
Tim Berners-Lee
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 22 Jul 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Link metadata cannot override
server media type
from DanC
Email from Chris
to TAG about SMIL 2.0, and
rationale
Email from Chris Lilley
on MSDN documentation on
MIME-sniffing in Internet Explorer
(FindMimeFromData method)
Email from Chris on MIME types
and encoding
Scott McGlashan email to TAG
with links to Voice WG points.
Bug filed by Martin Duerst
regarding default charset setting in
Apache conf file
Draft Finding
"Client Handling of
Authoritative metadata"
Approved Finding
Authoritative Metadata
agreed
on 4 Dec 2003
The
3 Dec 2003 Editor's Draft of the
Architecture Document
accurately represents the TAG's position on
the authoritative nature of server messages.
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 4 Dec 2002
agreement by reviewer on 4 Dec 2003
Acknowledged by TBL by virtue of WG
agreement
Action history
IJ
accepted on 8 Oct 2003
Produce a new draft of the finding
that takes into account comments
from reviewers on MIME finding.
proposal on 10 Dec 2003
10 Dec 2003 Draft
27 Jan 2004 Draft
. See
comments from Stuart
. See
18 Feb 2004 Draft
completed on 23 Feb 2004
TAG accepted 18 Feb 2004 draft. IJ
will publish as accepted finding.
deepLinking-25
What to say in defense of principle that deep linking is
not an illegal act?
link to this issue
Strawman from Tim Bray:
The architecture of the World Wide Web does
not support the notion of a "home
page" or a "gateway page",
and any effort in law to pretend otherwise
is therefore bad policy. The publication of
a Uniform Resource Identifier is, in the
architecture of the Web, a statement that a
resource is available for retrieval. The
technical protocols which are used for Web
interaction provide a variety of means for
site operators to control access, including
password protection and the requirement that
users take a particular route to a page. It
would be appropriate to bring the law to
bear against those who violate these
protocols. It is not appropriate to use it
in the case where information consumers are
using the Web according to its published
rules of operation.
Request
concerning
Slashdot article on court ruling in Denmark
Discussion history
30 Aug 2002
9 Sep 2002
7 Feb 2003
17 Feb 2003
15 Sep 2003
8 Oct 2003
3 Nov 2003
15 Nov 2003
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 5 Jul 2002 by
Tim Bray
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 22 Jul 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Summary from Henrik Frystyk
Nielsen
of Danish Court case (TAG only)
agreed
on 7 Feb 2003
Accepted
Draft finding from TB
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 7 Feb 2003
agreement by reviewer on 7 Feb 2003
Acknowledged by TB by virtue of WG
agreement
Action history
IJ
accepted on 15 Sep 2003
Take back to Comm Team publicity of
this finding.
dependent on 8 Oct 2003
on
W3C Communications Team
completed on 15 Nov 2003
TAG discussed this issue with Janet
Daly at ftf meeting in Japan.
contentPresentation-26
Separation of semantic and presentational markup, to the
extent possible, is architecturally sound.
link to this issue
Strawman from Tim Bray
I would however, support an assertion in the
architecture document that important
information SHOULD be stored and
(optionally) delivered with markup that is
as semantically rich as achievable, and that
separation of semantic and presentational
markup, to the extent possible, is
architecturally sound.
Request
concerning
XML
CSS
XSL-FO
XML Accessibility Guidelines
Discussion history
24 Sep 2002
6 Feb 2003
21 Jul 2003
8 Oct 2003
14 May 2004
7 Feb 2005
21 Sep 2005
Transition history
raised
on 15 Aug 2002 by
Dan Connolly
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 26 Aug 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Email from Kynn Bartlett
on separation of content from
presentation.
Email from Sean Palmer
about WAI PF work in this area.
Draft finding from CL:
Separation of semantic and
presentational markup, to the
extent possible, is
architecturally sound
Historical document
agreed
on 21 Sep 2005
Section
4.3 of Web Architecture
closes the issue.
Acknowledgment cycle
Not started
Action history
CL
accepted on 8 Oct 2003
Talk with others about aspects of
this finding and revise it.
completed on 14 May 2004
IRIEverywhere-27
Should W3C specifications start promoting IRIs?
link to this issue
The XML Core WG would like TAG input on
whether the desirability of adopting IRIs
into the web infrastructure early outweighs
the anticipated disruption of legacy
systems.
The XML Core WG would also like TAG input on
the wisdom of early adoption given the
"Internet Draft" status of the
IRI draft
. So far adoption has relied on "copy
and paste", but there is potential for
these definitions to get out of sync.
Request
concerning
XML
XML 1.1
[Internet Draft] IRI draft
Discussion history
28 Oct 2002
11 Nov 2002
18 Nov 2002
27 Jan 2003
6 Feb 2003
31 Mar 2003
7 Apr 2003
14 Apr 2003
28 Apr 2003
14 May 2004
21 Sep 2005
13 Dec 2005
23 Jan 2007
12 Feb 2007
26 Mar 2007
Transition history
raised
on 9 Oct 2002 by
Jonathan Marsh
, on behalf of
XML Core WG
accepted
on 28 Oct 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
URIEquivalence-15
Email from Larry Masinter
about
URI BOF minutes from IETF56
Summary email from Tim Bray
Comments from Ray Whitmer
about IRIs in the DOM (see same
email
with inclusion
. See
1.3.2 DOM URIs
in 7 May 2003 DOM 3 Core draft
RFC3490: Internationalizing
Domain Names in Applications
(IDNA)
See TB's
proposed step forward on IRI 27.
RFC 3987
is a Proposed Standard
Action history
CL
accepted on 7 Apr 2003
Revise position statement on use of
IRIs.
completed on 22 Mar 2004
This action has been completed and
replaced by virtue of the
action assigned to CL on 22
March
TBL
accepted on 28 Apr 2003
Explain how existing specifications
that handle IRIs are inconsistent.
TBL draft
not yet available on www-tag.
dropped on 24 Aug 2007
Merged into tracker
ACTION-24
HT
accepted on 21 Sep 2005
with Norm report the
Namespaces/URI/IRI discussion to XML
Core.
completed on 23 Jan 2007
DC
accepted on 23 Jan 2007
DanC to ask TimBL whether XQuery and
XML Namespaces 1.1 address
IRIEverywhere to his satisfaction,
noting
Mappings and identity in URIs
and IRIs
completed on 26 Mar 2007
TBL
accepted on 26 Mar 2007
TimBL to clarify
, perhaps by using N3
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-24
fragmentInXML-28
: Use of fragment identifiers in XML [
link to this issue
Do fragment identifiers refer to a
syntactice element (at least for XML
content), or can they refer to abstractions?
Example from
17.2.2 SVG fragment identifiers
MyDrawing.svg#svgView(viewBox(0,200,1000,1000))
The SVG spec states "This form of
addressing specifies the desired view of the
document (e.g., the region of the document
to view, the initial zoom level) completely
within the SVG fragment specification."
From Dan Connolly:
Do you consider the quoted paragraph above
in error?
Or do you disagree with my interpretation of
it, i.e. that
MyDrawing.svg#svgView(viewBox(0,200,1000,1000))
identifes a view of the drawing, and not any
particular XML element (nor other syntactic
structure) in the document.
Request
concerning
XML
Discussion history
12 May 2004
7 Feb 2005
10 May 2005
31 May 2005
1 Nov 2005
Transition history
raised
on 31 Oct 2002 by
Dan Connolly
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 4 Nov 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
httpRange-14
rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
(since the WSDL WG is asking us how
they should do nearly exactly what
we want the XML Schema WG to do e.g.
provide URIs for "schema"
components)
Guidelines for the Use of XML
within IETF Protocols
. See also
ietf-xml-use mailing list
in case the document disappears.
SemWeb use case
from Sandro Hawke.
Per
13 Jan 2003 teleconf
, note that the TAG considers
XInclude issues raised by M.
Murata
to be related to this issue. Which
media type should be used for
interpreting fragment identifiers?
Section 2.4 in the architecture
document says the media type of the
retrieval result, but Sections 4.2
and 4.3 in the XInclude CR says
text/xml or text/plain.
See
email from Paul Cotton
about WSDL component designators.
Also related: Content negotiation?
Opacity of URIs?
agreed
on 12 May 2004
In general, the fragment part of a
URI may be used to refer to
abstractions as well as syntactic
fragments of a representation; the
media type identifies a
specification, which explains the
semantics.
Acknowledgment cycle
Not started
Action history
CL
accepted on 12 May 2004
Summarize resolution.
dropped on 21 May 2007
Well past sell by date
HT
accepted on 7 Feb 2005
monitor and bring back up when time
is appropriate
dropped on 24 Aug 2007
dropped by chair
xmlProfiles-29
When, whither and how to profile W3C specifications in
the XML Family
link to this issue
When, whither and how to profile W3C
specifications in the XML Family
Request
concerning
XML family of specifications
Discussion history
2 Dec 2002
9 Dec 2002
16 Dec 2002
6 Jan 2003
13 Jan 2003
27 Jan 2003
6 Feb 2003
15 Sep 2003
5 Dec 2002
5 Jul 2005
Categories
Transition history
raised
on 25 Nov 2002 by
Paul Grosso
accepted
on 2 Dec 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
SOAP 1.2, 26 Jun 2002 draft
makes use of an XML format that does
not permit any internal subset,
despite the fact that XML 1.0 does
not define such a profile/subset of
XML. See
rationale from David Fallside
Options for dealing with ID
, from Chris Lilley
Web services arch WG position
from Mike Champion
Glenn Adams email
on the existence of a number of
standards in the television domain
that: (1) disallow internal
declaration subsets; (2) require
standalone="no"; (3)
require a document type declaration,
with a specifically enumerated set
of public FPIs to be supported;
Extensible Messaging and
Presence Protocol (XMPP) Core,
draft-ietf-xmpp-core-06
From Chris Lilley
: "XMPP dissalows PIs,
commnents, and both internal and
external TD subsets."
Henry Thompson proposal
for "minimal" conformance
class.
agreed
on 27 Jan 2003
TAG recommendation for work on subset of
XML 1.1
. See
followup to AC (Member-only)
. Work is being carried out in the XML Core
WG.
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 30 Jan 2003
Action history
VQ
accepted on 5 Jul 2005
check status of XMLProfiles-29 with
Paul Grosso
dropped on 8 Jun 2007
Dropped by chair (overtaken bye
events)
binaryXML-30
: Standardize a "binary XML" format? [
link to this issue
Given that binary infosets (currently,
binary PSVIs
) is what I work on daily and that I am
currently investigating ways in which they
could fit naturally into the web
(content-coding registration for instance),
I would be very interested in knowing what
-- if anything at this point -- the TAG
thinks of them and of how they could best
fit in.
Request
concerning
XML
Discussion history
2 Dec 2002
13 Jan 2003
27 Jan 2003
6 Feb 2003
17 Feb 2003
12 May 2004
7 Feb 2005
28 Feb 2005
15 Mar 2005
5 Apr 2005
12 Apr 2005
26 Apr 2005
3 May 2005
10 May 2005
Transition history
raised
on 9 Oct 2002 by
Robin Berjon
accepted
on 2 Dec 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
See
explanation scenario from DC
; a typical conversation about
binary XML.
Rationale from Robin Berjon
XML binary compression progress:
X3D, XFSP project
from Don Brutzman.
OGC is another customer for binary
XML.
Binary XML Workshop Minutes
Summary from Chris
XML Binary Characterization Use
Cases
TAG opinion on XML Binary Format
, 24 May 2005.
deferred
on 12 May 2004
W3C has chartered the
XML Binary Characterization Working
Group
to address this issue. The TAG anticipates
reviewing the WG's deliverables in this
area.
Action history
TB
accepted on 17 Feb 2003
Write to www-tag with his thoughts
on adding to survey.
dropped on 4 Dec 2003
TB said he had nothing to add to the
survey.
metadataInURI-31
Should metadata (e.g., versioning information) be
encoded in URIs?
link to this issue
The TAG's preliminary response is that URIs
should not include metadata. The TAG
accepted this issue to provide guidance on
addressing the issues raised.
From Ossi:
To outline the following text, I'm actually
suggesting (asking comments for) two rather
practical things:
There should be a uniform way to
declare version history of web
resources (recommended by W3C)?, and
more importantly
There should be a "clean",
uniform way to refer to (and thus
access) the metadata of web
resources?
Request
concerning
Architecture Document
URI
Discussion history
2 Dec 2002
6 Feb 2003
7 Jul 2003
21 Jul 2003
8 Oct 2003
14 May 2004
7 Feb 2005
21 Sep 2005
13 Dec 2005
21 Mar 2006
2 May 2006
16 May 2006
30 May 2006
14 Jun 2006
25 Jul 2006
8 Aug 2006
19 Sep 2006
4 Oct 2006
7 Nov 2006
14 Nov 2006
11 Dec 2006
2 Jan 2007
Transition history
raised
on 25 Nov 2002 by
Ossi Nykänen
accepted
on 2 Dec 2002
Background, proposals, threads, notes
See
Arch Doc
See
Tim Bray mail on Apple Music
Store
Fnding
Email from Tony Hammond
on
The OpenURL Framework
(PDF)
On the topic of URI fragility, see
the section entitled
Why Names Change
in TBL's
The Myth of Names and Addresses
Comments from Larry Masinter
on draft finding
See comments from
Mark Nottingham
and
followup from Noah M.
Guide to Feedback and
Outstanding Issues
by Noah M.
agreed
on 11 Dec 2006
See
resolution
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 3 Jan 2007
Action history
SW
accepted on 21 Jul 2003
Produce a revision of this finding
based on Vancouver ftf meeting
discussion.
dropped on 24 Jan 2006
DO
accepted on 21 Jul 2003
Send rationale about why WSDL WG
wants to peek inside the URI.
dropped on 14 Jun 2006
RF
accepted on 21 Sep 2005
Make progress on metadataInURI-31
with Noah
dropped on 24 Jan 2006
ER
accepted on 21 Mar 2006
ER and TVR to review draft finding
on Authoritative Metadata
completed on 27 Mar 2006
NM
accepted on 30 May 2006
produce new version of
The use of Metadata in URIs
completed on 14 Jun 2006
NM
accepted on 14 Jun 2006
Noah to produce final draft of
metadataInURI-31 by 11 August 2006
completed on 15 Sep 2006
NM
accepted on 19 Sep 2006
Add security section on risks of
serving executables as .jpeg to
metadataInURI draft. Confirmed on
4 Oct 2006
completed on 7 Nov 2006
ER
accepted on 4 Oct 2006
Review security section on risks of
serving executables as .jpeg to
metadataInURI draft.
completed on 14 Nov 2006
DC
accepted on 4 Oct 2006
Review security section on risks of
serving executables as .jpeg to
metadataInURI draft. Confirmed on
14 Nov 2006
completed on 11 Dec 2006
NM
accepted on 14 Nov 2006
Rework metadataInURI 1st example to
be more explicit as per Tim's
suggestion, and update GPN per Dan's
suggestion.
completed on 11 Dec 2006
HT
accepted on 14 Nov 2006
Seek a copy of the official court
record of the UK case on ../../ etc.
completed on 11 Dec 2006
NM
accepted on 11 Dec 2006
Noah to update status to make
metadataInURI an approved finding.
completed on 3 Jan 2007
VQ
accepted on 11 Dec 2006
announce metadataInURI draft once
it's in final form.
completed on 3 Jan 2007
xmlIDSemantics-32
How should the problem of identifying ID semantics in
XML languages be addressed in the absence of a DTD?
link to this issue
I would like to raise a new issue to the
TAG. The issue is how to determine ID
attributes in any new work on XML, such as a
new profile or subset as dealt within issue
xmlProfiles-29
. I understand that this issue will be
normatively referred to in any
communications on issue #29.
Chris Lilley has started an
excellent discussion
on the various options for ID attributes, so
I won't duplicate that work. A number of
responders have said they are quite
supportive of providing a definition of IDs
as part of any new work on XMLProfiles, such
as the Web Services Architecture Working
Group. There is also some pushback, so it
seems worthy to have a continued discussion,
and the TAG should attempt to quickly reach
consensus.
Request
concerning
XML 1.1
Discussion history
27 Jan 2003
6 Feb 2003
14 Apr 2003
30 Jun 2003
8 Oct 2003
12 Jan 2004
7 Feb 2004
12 May 2004
19 Apr 2005
21 Sep 2005
Transition history
raised
on 30 Jan 2003 by
David Orchard
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 30 Jan 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Offshoot of
xmlProfiles-29
. This issue was raised on request
from the TAG at their
27 Jan 2003
teleconference.
Options for dealing with IDs
from Chris Lilley
Web Services Architecture WG
position on XML profiling/subset
ting
from Mike Champion
Finding
from Chris Lilley: Approved by TAG
12 May 2004
xml:id Requirements
from the
W3C XML Core Working Group
See
Comments from Henry Thompson
on the XPointer Framework definition
of Shorthand Pointer.
deferred
on 12 May 2004
At their 12 May 2004 ftf meeting, the TAG
accepted the proposed finding "How should
the problem of identifying ID semantics in
XML languages be addressed in the absence of
a DTD?". The issue is deferred while the XML
Core WG continues work on this issue.
agreed
on 21 Sep 2005
xml:id Version 1.0
is a Recommendation
Acknowledgment cycle
Not started
Action history
NW
accepted on 5 May 2003
Point Core WG to CL finding once
made public.
dependent on 30 Jun 2003
on
XML Core WG progress
proposal on 12 Jan 2004
NW: I can find no record of having
completed this action, but I believe
that I did and cite[2] the pointer
from the XML Core WG home page as
evidence that I did.
completed on 12 Jan 2004
mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
Composability for user interface-oriented XML namespaces
link to this issue
Raised by the TAG as an offshoot of
mixedNamespaceMeaning-13
Request
concerning
XHTML
MathML
SVG
XForms
SMIL
other user interface-oriented applications
Discussion history
6 Feb 2003
2 Mar 2004
7 Feb 2005
21 Sep 2005
1 Nov 2005
10 Jan 2006
Transition history
raised
on 6 Feb 2003 by TAG, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 6 Feb 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Offshoot of
mixedNamespaceMeaning-13
An XHTML + MathML + SVG Profile
W3C Workshop on Web Applications
and Compound Documents
W3C Compound Document Formats
Working Group
deferred
on 1 Nov 2005
Pend this issue until significant progress
is made by the
W3C Compound Document Formats Working
Group
in a public working draft.
Action history
NM
accepted on 21 Sep 2003
Review CDF requirements and report
back.
completed on 18 Oct 2005
TBL
accepted on 21 Sep 2005
review CDF requirements and report
back
dropped on 10 Jan 2006
xmlFunctions-34
XML Transformation and composability (e.g., XSLT,
XInclude, Encryption)
link to this issue
Raised by the TAG as an offshoot of
mixedNamespaceMeaning-13
Request
concerning
XSLT
XInclude
Encryption
other specifications that involve transformations of
XML content
Discussion history
6 Feb 2003
21 Sep 2005
31 Jan 2006
7 Feb 2006
18 Apr 2006
25 Apr 2006
11 Dec 2006
30 Jan 2007
11 Jun 2007
Transition history
raised
on 6 Feb 2003 by TAG, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 6 Feb 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Offshoot of
mixedNamespaceMeaning-13
The Interpretation of XML
documents
from TBL.
The elaborated infoset: A
proposal
Action history
NW
accepted on 6 Dec 2005
with help from HT, produce a draft
finding on XML functions in January
dropped on 11 Dec 2006
TVR
accepted on 27 Feb 2006
summarize history of
DTD/namespace/mimetype version
practice, including XHTML, SOAP, and
XSLT. Confirmed on
11 Dec 2006
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-25
TBL
accepted on 27 Feb 2006
write a short email to make his
point so we capture this for future
completed on 11 Dec 2006
HT
accepted on 11 Dec 2006
create a draft finding on
xmlFunctions-34 to the working group
by the 8th of Feb. 2007.
completed on 30 Jan 2007
See
The elaborated infoset: A
proposal
NW
accepted on 11 Dec 2006
review Henry's draft.
dropped on 16 Jul 2007
Withdrawn pending a new draft.
TBL
accepted on 11 Dec 2006
review Henry's draft.
dropped on 16 Jul 2007
Withdrawn pending a new draft.
SW
accepted on 26 Mar 2007
SKW to send comments on
urnsAndRegistries draft
completed on 28 Mar 2007
Email review sent
HT
accepted on 11 Jun 2007
Henry to prepare new draft of
xmlFunctions-34 by mid-July
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-26
RDFinXHTML-35
Syntax and semantics for embedding RDF in XHTML
link to this issue
Raised by the TAG as an offshoot of
mixedNamespaceMeaning-13
Request
concerning
RDF
XHTML
Discussion history
6 Feb 2003
14 May 2004
22 Feb 2005
28 Feb 2005
13 Dec 2005
14 Jun 2006
13 Dec 2006
12 Feb 2007
Transition history
raised
on 6 Feb 2003 by TAG, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 6 Feb 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Offshoot of
mixedNamespaceMeaning-13
namespaceDocument-8
Using RDF/XML with HTML and
XHTML
Some discussion about approaches
"Crisp" statement of
the problem
from Dan Connolly
Email from M. Ishikawa
on using modular namespaces (MNS)
RDF in XHTML
summary by TBL.
GRDDL: Gleaning Resource
Descriptions from Dialects of
Languages
by Dan Connolly and Dominique
Hazael-Massieux.
deferred
on 13 Dec 2006
The TAG decided to defer this issue pending
work by the GRDDL WG and/or the
RDFa/HTML/SemWeb-deployment WGs.
Action history
TBL
accepted on 6 Feb 2003
State the issue with a reference to
XML Core work. See
email from TimBL
capturing some of the issues.
dropped on 14 May 2004
DC
accepted on 12 Feb 2007
DanC to ask Mimasa and Mark Birbeck
about feasability of using
substitution groups in XHTML
modularization, cc
public-xml-versioning
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-27
and moved under
XMLVersioning-41
siteData-36
Web site metadata improving on robots.txt, w3c/p3p and
favicon etc.
link to this issue
The architecture of the web is that the
space of identifiers on an http web site is
owned by the owner of the domain name. The
owner, "publisher", is free to
allocate identifiers and define how they are
served.
Any variation from this breaks the web. The
problem is that there are some conventions
for the identifies on websites, that
/robots.txt is a file controlling
robot access
/w3c/p3p is where you put a privacy
policy
/favico is an icon representative of
the web site
and who knows what others. There is of
course no list available of the assumptions
different groups and manufacturers have
used.
More in the
original message from TBL
Request
concerning
URI space
Discussion history
24 Feb 2003
8 Oct 2003
5 Jan 2004
12 Jan 2004
22 Feb 2005
13 Dec 2005
2 May 2006
9 Jan 2007
Transition history
raised
on 10 Feb 2003 by
Tim Berners-Lee
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 24 Feb 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Note:
Defining a Web Site
Sitemap protocol
Action history
TB
accepted on 8 Oct 2003
(due 2004-01-08)
Refine strawman based on 8 Oct 2003
meeting and draft new finding.
Reconfirmed at
5 Jan 2004 teleconf with due
date 7 Jan.
. Agreed to add use cases to finding
at
12 Jan 2004 teleconf
proposal on 12 Jan 2003
Proposal
dropped on 2 May 2006
DC
accepted on 12 Jan 2003
Propose an example of a site
description.
dropped on 9 Jan 2007
abstractComponentRefs-37
Definition of abstract components with namespace names
and frag ids
link to this issue
Is it wise to use fragment IDs for
identifying abstract components within a
namespace, even though it is the most
natural and convenient mechanism? Is there
another mechanism that would be preferable?
Request
concerning
Namespaces in XML
WSDL
Discussion history
24 Mar 2003
14 Apr 2003
5 May 2003
23 Jun 2003
8 Oct 2003
20 Oct 2003
2 Mar 2004
22 Feb 2005
3 May 2005
16 Jun 2005
21 Sep 2005
25 Oct 2005
1 Nov 2005
16 May 2006
14 Jun 2006
Transition history
raised
on 3 Feb 2003 by
Jonathan Marsh
, on behalf of
WSD WG
accepted
on 24 Mar 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
namespaceDocument-8
Email from Tim Bray
about relation to RDDL.
Email from Paul Cotton
about Schema WG response to the WSD
WG questions about Schema Component
Designators
Email from Noah Mendelsohn
about distinction between schema
components and schema documents.
Email from Larry Masinter
on relation to WebDAV to providing
access to metadata.
Summary of options from David
Orchard
Draft summary
Comments from MSM on behalf of
Schema WG
"XML Schema: Component
Designators"
specification published by the W3C
XML Schema WG.
Draft finding
Abstract Component References
Action history
DO
accepted on 8 Oct 2003
Write up resolution from 8 Oct 2003
meeting and include in revised
finding on this topic.
completed on 20 Oct 2003
DO
accepted on 20 Oct 2003
Revise draft finding based on
comments at 20 Oct teleconf.
proposal on 3 Nov 2003
IJ published this from material sent
by DO to IJ privately on 30 Oct
2003.
completed on 14 Jun 2006
DC
accepted on 21 Sep 2005
seek clarification about
completed on 27 Sep 2005
putMediaType-38
Relation of HTTP PUT to GET, and whether client headers
to server are authoritative
link to this issue
Some scenarios that this issue concerns:
Client PUTs representation to server
without content type information;
what is proper server behavior?
Client PUTs representation to server
with content type information, but
server ignores. Is this
architecturally incorrect?
Client PUTs representation to server
with detectably inconsistent content
type information. What is proper
server behavior (e.g., signal error
and not silently ignoring)?
Request
concerning
Authority of client headers
Discussion history
16 Jun 2003
22 Feb 2005
26 Apr 2005
3 May 2005
21 Sep 2005
6 Dec 2005
28 Mar 2006
11 Apr 2006
Transition history
raised
on 6 May 2003 by
Julian Reschke
accepted
on 16 Jun 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
contentTypeOverride-24
"PUT semantics and MIME
header handling"
First version of approved
finding "Authoritative Metadata"
(25 Feb. 2004)
Reopening discussion
New version of approved finding
Authoritative Metadata
(12 April 2006)
agreed
on 18 Apr 2006
Approved TAG finding
Authoritative Metadata
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 19 Apr 2006
Action history
RF
accepted on 22 Feb 2005
prepare putMediaType-38 for further
discussion
completed on 3 May 2005
reopening discussion.
RF
accepted on 21 Sep 2005
update
Authoritative Metadata
finding to include resolution of
putMediaType-38. Reconfirmed
8 Nov 2005
completed on 7 Mar 2006
Authoritative Metadata finding
updated.
RF
accepted on 6 Dec 2005
produce a new version of the finding
Authoritative Metadata
by the end of the year
completed on 7 Mar 2006
Authoritative Metadata finding
updated.
ER
accepted on 28 Mar 2006
Propose disclaimer and discuss with
Roy.
dropped on 11 Apr 2006
rdfURIMeaning-39
: Meaning of URIs in RDF documents [
link to this issue
TBL: "The community needs:
A concise statement of the above
architectural elements from
different specs in one place,
written in terms which the ontology
community will understand, with
pointers to the relevant
specifications.
Some outline guidance on specific
questions brought up in email
questions.
This includes:
Is a given inference engine expected
to take into account a given
document under given circumstances?
how does one avoid having to commit
to things one does not trust?
There may be some need to clarify frequent
misunderstandings by making some things
clear."
Request
concerning
URI
RDF
OWL
HTTP
Discussion history
18 Aug 2003
15 Sep 2003
22 Feb 2003
21 Sep 2005
13 Dec 2005
Transition history
raised
on 13 Jul 2003 by
Tim Berners-Lee
, on behalf of
Semantic Web CG
accepted
on 18 Aug 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Some
background summarized by DanC
Mailing list for discussions on this
issue: public-sw-meaning (
archive
Action history
DC
accepted on 21 Sep 2005
Notify the SW CG that we talked
about rdfURIMeaning-39 and didn't
decide to do anything now
completed on 27 Sep 2005
Mail sent to Semantic Web
Coordination Group.
URIGoodPractice-40
: What are good practices for URI construction? [
link to this issue
Some issues:
Fragment identifier syntax
Related issue: URI Squatting?
Request
concerning
URI
Discussion history
20 Oct 2003
14 May 2004
22 Feb 2005
21 Sep 2005
13 Dec 2005
Transition history
raised
on 16 Oct 2003 by
David Orchard
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 20 Oct 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
abstractComponentRefs-37
Well Designed URLs are
Beautiful!
Action history
RF
accepted on 20 Oct 2003
Draft a finding for this issue.
Reconfirmed
21 Sep 2005
dropped on 24 Jan 2006
RF
accepted on 21 Sep 2005
consider noting in finding on good
uri practices that gooduri#xmlname
is a useful pattern because it can
be used easily in RDF
dropped on 24 Jan 2006
XMLVersioning-41
What are good practices for designing extensible XML
languages and for handling versioning?
link to this issue
What are good practices for designing
extensible XML languages and for handling
versioning?
Request
concerning
XML
Discussion history
3 Nov 2003
10 Nov 2003
15 Nov 2003
2 Mar 2003
14 May 2004
14 Feb 2005
21 Sep 2005
22 Sep 2005
8 Nov 2005
5 Dec 2005
14 Feb 2006
27 Feb 2006
3 Mar 2006
12 Jun 2006
18 Jul 2006
25 Jul 2006
8 Aug 2006
29 Aug 2006
5 Sep 2006
4 Oct 2006
5 Oct 2006
5 Oct 2006
12 Dec 2006
12 Dec 2006
16 Apr 2007
23 Apr 2007
30 Apr 2007
14 May 2007
30 May 2007
30 May 2007
31 May 2007
25 Jun 2007
Transition history
raised
on 27 Jun 2003 by
David Orchard
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 3 Nov 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Draft finding from DO and NW
part 1
part 2
Text proposed by DO and NW for
Arch Doc
Instance diagram
Action history
IJ
accepted on 3 Nov 2003
Propose shortened version of DO/NW
proposed text
proposal on 7 Nov 2003
Revised text
completed on 10 Nov 2003
IJ/DO/NW
accepted on 10 Nov 2003
Propose revision of IJ proposal that
better addresses NW and DO concerns.
proposal on 11 Nov 2003
Part of
11 Nov 2003 Editor's Draft
completed on 15 Nov 2003
Text reviewed, edited at FTF meeting
in Japan.
TBL
accepted on 14 Jul 2003
Suggest changes to section about
extensibility related to "when to
tunnel".
dropped on 14 May 2004
DO
accepted on 3 Mar 2005
contextualize his scenarios, such as
more on what is happening with SOAP
and WSDL.
completed on 14 Feb 2006
DO
accepted on 22 Sep 2005
Update finding with ext/vers
dropped on 12 Jun 2006
DO
accepted on 22 Sep 2005
with NM continue and extrapolate the
versioning work DO et al have been
doing already, updating the
terminology section. Reconfirmed
5 Dec 2005
14 Feb 2006
12 Jun 2006
completed on 5 Oct 2006
DC
accepted on 22 Sep 2005
derive RDF/RDFS/OWL version of
terminology from whiteboard /
diagram
. Reconfirmed
8 Nov 2005
completed on 14 Feb 2006
HT
accepted on 22 Sep 2005
make sure that what he is doing with
ontology of XML infoset fits with
what DanC is doing on ontology of
Language etc. Reconfirmed on
12 Jun 2006
dropped on 5 Oct 2006
DO
accepted on 4 Oct 2005
update extensibility finding with
the result of Edinburgh F2F
discussion and related diagrams.
Reconfirmed
8 Nov 2005
completed on 21 Feb 2006
DO
accepted on 5 Dec 2005
produce a new draft of his
versioning finding by the end of the
year
dropped on 12 Jun 2006
DO
accepted on 21 Feb 2006
provide two diagrams: one
XML-ignorant, one XML-aware
completed on 12 Jun 2006
VQ
accepted on 3 Mar 2006
Write to www-tag about CSS
versioning being a problem "levels".
Reconfirmed
12 Jun 2006
5 Oct 2006
dropped on 21 May 2007
DC
accepted on 3 Mar 2006
Look at the document and see if it
is good for informing on this SMIL
problem of multiple namespaces.
Reconfirmed
12 Jun 2006
dropped on 12 Jun 2006
DC
accepted on 8 Aug 2006
Review definitions of partial
understanding, backward compatible,
and forward compatible.
Progress report
, confirmed
5 Oct 2006
9 July 2007
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-4
HT
accepted on 5 Oct 2006
Henry to extend his paper to a
definition of monotonicity and its
relevance to our versioning finding.
dropped on 9 Jul 2007
DC
accepted on 5 Oct 2006
Capture UML diagram for the minutes.
dropped on 21 May 2007
NW
accepted on 12 Dec 2006
Produce some information about NVDL
for the finding. Continued
9 July 2007
proposal on 12 Jul 2007
Email about NVDL and versioning.
completed on 20 Aug 2007
HT
accepted on 23 Apr 2007
Henry to unearth thread in which he
and Robin Berjon discussed XML
versioning
completed on 21 May 2007
DO
accepted on 23 Apr 2007
Dave Orchard to draft discussion of
using substitution groups for
examples like HTML

mixed
content and/or content.
proposal on 2 May 2007
Email from David Orchard "Use of
Substitution Groups" take 2
proposal on 2 May 2007
Email from David Orchard "Use of
Substitution Groups" take 2.1
completed on 14 May 2007
NW
accepted on 23 Apr 2007
Norm to review
for discussion on 14 May telcon.
proposal on 11 May 2007
Email from Norm "(Partial) review of
Versioning XML"
completed on 14 May 2007
DO
accepted on 14 May 2007
dorchard to produce revised
Versioning-part1 and Versioning-XML
for May 18th
completed on 17 May 2007
Email from Dave announcing new
drafts.
NW
accepted on 31 May 2007
NDW to note a problem near
webarch/#pr-version-info in the
errata. Continued:
9 July 2007
proposal on 12 Jul 2007
Errata message from Norm
completed on 16 Jul 2007
NM
accepted on 31 May 2007
NM to draft a blog item for review
and, pending creation of a TAG blog
mechanism, post it. Continued:
9 July 2007
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-28
NM
accepted on 30 May 2007
NM to write up his paper comments on
extensibility and versioning
Continued:
9 July 2007
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-29
DO
accepted on 11 Jun 2007
Dave Orchard to revise Versioning
Findings in response to F2F
discussions.
proposal on 25 Jun 2007
Continuation:David to update all 3
documents in versioning finding (by
mid-July2007)
completed on 9 Jul 2007
ultimateQuestion-42
What is the answer to life, the universe, and
everything.
link to this issue
This "issue" collects all discussions
relevant to Web architecture that are not
directly related to any other issue.
Request
concerning
The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Discussion history
15 Nov 2003
Transition history
raised
on 15 Nov 2003 by
Tim Berners-Lee
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 15 Nov 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Wikipedia entry on issue 42
Google Calculator; cf 6*9
- - - - - - - - - -
Semantic Web Architecture:
16 Jun 2005
22 Sep 2005
13 Dec 2006
Self-describing Web:
06 Dec 2005
27 Feb 2006
6 Mar 2007
1 Jun 2007
State in Web application design
21 Feb 2006
28 Mar 2006
25 Apr 2006
9 May 2006
6 June 2006
13 June 2006
26 Sep 2006
Security/Authentication:
15 Jun 2005
5 Jul 2005
20 Sep 2005
8 Nov 2005
24 Jan 2006
21 Mar 2006
11 Apr 2006
25 Apr 2006
13 Jun 2006
CURIEs:
30 May 2006
13 Jun 2006
27 Jun 2006
26 Feb 2007
19 Mar 2007
2 Apr 2007

See
abbreviatedURIs-56
for continuing discussion.
Device description repositories:
6 Jun 2006
27 Jun 2006
New and changing media types:
18 Jul 2006
25 Jul 2006
Naming and Virtual Worlds
18 June 2007
Action history
HT
accepted on 16 Jun 2005
HT, VQ to review the
primer
(getting into RDF & Semantic Web
using N3)
dropped on 24 Aug 2007
Dropped by chair
TBL
accepted on 16 Jun 2005
Revise
dropped on 24 Aug 2007
Dropped by chair
HT
accepted on 16 Jun 2005
Recommend intro to Dretske thought
dropped on 24 Aug 2007
Dropped by chair
TBL
accepted on 22 Sep 2005
TBL and NW to write a draft of Nadia
and Dirk first semantic web book
dropped on 24 Aug 2007
dropped by chair
DC
accepted on 15 Jun 2005
Write a report on the state of the
art authentication in the web.
proposal on 20 Sep 2005
Presentation at Edinburgh f2f, see
also
minutes of 5 Jul 05
dropped on 21 Mar 2006
Withdrawn as of DC's report on the
W3C workshop on security
DC
accepted on 15 Jun 2005
Draft "Dont use passwords in the
clear". See
minutes of 5 Jul 05
dropped on 18 Apr 2006
Obsoleted in favor of Ed's action of
18 Apr 06 under
passwordsInTheClear-52
NW
accepted on 25 Apr 2006
Review draft state finding for 9
May.
dropped on 16 Jul 2007
DC
accepted on 30 May 2006
Contact Misha to follow up on f2f
discussion on CURIEs at AC meeting
completed on 14 Jul 2006
VQ
accepted on 6 Jun 2006
Invite a DD WG person to a TAG
meeting to discuss DDR requirements
dropped on 8 Jun 2007
Dropped by chair (overtaken bye
events)
DO
accepted on 13 Jun 2006
Revise CSCP (Cookies, Shopping
Carts, Personalization, etc) in
State finding. Confirmed
26 Sep 2006
dropped on 24 Aug 2007
Dropped by chair
NW
accepted on 13 Jun 2006
Review new version of state finding
when it comes out. Confirmed
26 Sep 2006
dropped on 16 Jul 2007
Withdrawn pending a new draft.
NM
accepted on 13 Jun 2006
Review new version of state finding
when it comes out
dropped on 16 Jul 2007
Withdrawn pending a new draft.
NM
accepted on 18 Jul 2006
draft a very short email suggesting
that in general its good [using
media types that aren't yet
registered but used]
completed on 21 Jul 2006
NM
accepted on 25 Jul 2006
Redraft [position on unregistered
mime types], forward to AB unless
unresolved negative comments from
TAG members
completed on 4 Aug 2006
TBL
accepted on 5 Oct 2006
With Norm, draft semantic web
architecture stories and such.
completed on 13 Dec 2006
ER
accepted on 13 Dec 2006
Will try to outline or sketch a
story.
dropped on 24 Aug 2007
dropped by chair
TBL
accepted on 13 Dec 2006
Tim and Norm to produce a new draft
of "Data on the Web" by end of
January 2007.
on 24 Aug 2007
droppped by chair
SW
accepted on 26 Feb 2007
Stuart to contact the Semantic Web
Deployment and HTML WG chairs for an
update on the status of this
document and to encourage them to
make it public.
proposal on 27 Feb 2007
Email to HTML-WG and SWD-WG chairs
and team-contacts requesting
visibility of CURIE WD
completed on 7 Mar 2007
HT
accepted on 19 Mar 2007
HST to circulate a candidate
description to tag@w3.org [to frame
a distinct topic/issue on CURIE].
completed on 30 Mar 2007
NM
accepted on 30 Apr 2007
Noah to create a new draft on
self-describing Web by 23rd for
review at F2F
completed on 24 May 2007
NM
accepted on 11 Jun 2007
Noah to revise Self-Describing Web
finding in response to F2F
discussion.
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-30
NM
accepted on 18 Jun 2007
NM to contact Don Brutzman to query
about possible contacts about naming
in V-Ws and integration with the
Web.
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-2
DerivedResources-43
: How are secondary resources derived? [
link to this issue
How are secondary resources derived? The TAG
discussed the case of parse='xml' and
fragment identifiers in XInclude.
Request
concerning
XInclude
Discussion history
15 Nov 2003
12 May 2004
21 Sep 2005
31 Jan 2006
Transition history
raised
on 15 Nov 2003 by
David Orchard
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 15 Nov 2003
Background, proposals, threads, notes
XInclude issues list
Action history
NW
accepted on 12 May 2004
Write to David Orchard saying that
XInclude no longer uses frag ids and
the TAG is unable to construct from
its meeting record what the issue
was. We will discuss this further if
we get help, but otherwise expect to
close without action.
proposal on 28 Jun 2004
NW reports that he has sent mail;
awaiting reply.
completed on 31 Jan 2006
xmlChunk-44
: Chunk of XML - Canonicalization and equality [
link to this issue
The XML architecture has tended to be built
according to a motto that all kinds of
things are possible, and the application has
to be able to chose the features it needs.
This is fine when there are simply the XML
toolset and a single "application". However,
real life is more complicated, and things
are connected together in all kinds of ways.
I think the XML design needs to be more
constraining: to offer a consistent idea of
what a chunk of XML is across all the
designs, so that the value of that chunk can
be preserved as invariant across a complex
system. Digital Signature and RDF transport
are just intermediate parts of the design
which need to be transparent. This required
a notion of equality, and a related
canonical serialization.
Request
concerning
XML
Discussion history
2 Feb 2004
2 Mar 2004
12 May 2004
18 Apr 2006
12 Feb 2007
Transition history
raised
on 12 Jan 2004 by
TBL
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 2 Feb 2004
Background, proposals, threads, notes
1 Mar 2004: XML Core WG discussion
of issue
agreed
on 7 Mar 2007
xmlChunk-44 was an attempt to tackle deep
equals for XML. The
TAG now think
we can't do better than XML Functions and
Operators.
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 12 Jul 2007
Action history
NW
accepted on 2 Feb 2003
Summarize xmlChunk-44, solicit input
from www-tag.
proposal on 18 Feb 2003
The xmlChunk-44 problem statement
(resend)
completed on 13 Apr 2004
Chair declared closed.
NW
accepted on 2 Feb 2003
Coordinate joint meeting with XML
Core, notably around xmlChunk-44.
proposal on 18 Feb 2003
Tuesday, 4 March
liaison with XML Core
completed on 13 Apr 2004
Chair declared closed.
NW
accepted on 12 May 2004
Write up a named equivalence
function based on today's discussion
(e.g., based on infoset, augmented
with xml:lang/xml:base, not
requiring prefixes, etc.).: Write up
a named equivalence function based
on today's discussion (e.g., based
on infoset, augmented with
xml:lang/xml:base, not requiring
prefixes, etc.).
proposal on 28 Jun 2004
See email for details of proposal.
dropped on 16 Jul 2007
Overtaken by closure of issue.
NW
accepted on 12 Feb 2007
Norm to review draft finding on
xmlChunk-44 to see whether issue can
be closed and finding approved.
dropped on 16 Jul 2007
Overtaken by closure of issue.
NW
accepted on 7 Mar 2007
Norm to mark as abandoned the
finding on deep equals and announce
xmlChunk-44 is being closed without
further action, with reason
completed on 16 Jul 2007
Details in
agenda
mediaTypeManagement-45
What is the appropriate level of granularity of the
media type mechanism?
link to this issue
The TAG raised this issue to discuss issues
such as paramterization of media type
strings to provide additional granularity
for different format versions.
Request
concerning
RFC 2045
Discussion history
14 May 2004
4 Oct 2005
Transition history
raised
on 14 May 2004 by
TBL
, on behalf of
TAG
accepted
on 14 May 2004
Background, proposals, threads, notes
See also issue
uriMediaType-9
See also
Compound Document Formats WG
Action history
CL
accepted on 14 May 2004
Write draft finding on this issue.
dropped on 31 Oct 2006
VQ
accepted on 4 Oct 2005
check with CDF WG to see how they
have solved media type issue(s) and
if they have more details
dropped on 8 Jun 2007
Dropped by chair (overtaken bye
events)
xml11Names-46
Impact of changes to XML 1.1 on other XML Specifications
link to this issue
XML 1.1 makes essentially four changes to
XML 1.0:
It increases the number of
characters that may legally appear
in Names.
Adds several new characters that may
appear in text if they are encoded
as numeric character references (C0
controls except NUL).
Removes several characters so that
they may not appear in text if they
are not encoded as numeric character
references (C1 controls).
Adds as a line-end character.
XML Schema 1.0 normatively refers to XML
Namespaces 1.0 for the definition of QName
and XML Namespaces 1.0 normatively refers to
XML 1.0 for the definition of Name and XML
1.0 has fewer Name characters than XML 1.1.
That means that by a strict interpretation
of the Recommendations, it is impossible to
write an XML Schema for a document that uses
the "new" Name characters. And by extension,
it is impossible for an XPath expression or
a protocol document to use XML 1.1.
Request
concerning
XML 1.1
Discussion history
7 Jun 2004
28 Jun 2004
4 Oct 2005
31 Jan 2006
13 Dec 2006
Transition history
raised
on 19 May 2004 by
Mark Nottingham
, on behalf of
XML Protocol WG
accepted
on 7 Jun 2004
Action history
NW
accepted on 14 Jun 2004
Forward
proposal
to the XML CG.
dependent on 28 Jun 2004
on
XML CG
completed on 3 May 2006
See section 5.4 of the
XML CG minutes
NW
accepted on 4 Oct 2005
check on current status of issue
xml11Names-46 with XML CG
dropped on 13 Dec 2006
HT
accepted on 7 Feb 2006
bring us back to xml11Names-46 after
the XML Schema WG publishes its
expected Last Call WD.
completed on 13 Dec 2006
NW
accepted on 13 Dec 2006
Find a test case; reminds self to
check with Henry for the Ice Cream
example.
proposal on 12 Jul 2007
Test case email from Norm
completed on 20 Aug 2007
endPointRefs-47
WS-Addressing SOAP binding & app protocols
link to this issue
From the commenters
email
"In a nutshell, it [
WS-Addressing - SOAP Binding
] requires that the URI in the "Address"
component of a WS-Addressing EPR be
serialized into a wsa:To SOAP header,
independent of the underlying protocol. IMO,
a Web-architecture consistent means of doing
this would be to serialize it to the
Request-URI when using SOAP with HTTP, or
the "RCPT TO:" value when using SOAP with
SMTP, etc.."
The issue has been raised with the relevant
WG
and
declined
The
WS-Addressing SOAP Binding CR
of 17 Aug 2005 still has this problem.
Request
concerning
Web Services Addressing - SOAP Binding
Discussion history
24 Jan 2005
29 Mar 2005
5 Apr 2005
19 Apr 2005
22 Sep 2005
4 Oct 2005
11 Oct 2005
18 Oct 2005
25 Oct 2005
1 Nov 2005
22 Nov 2005
6 Dec 2005
24 Jan 2006
28 Mar 2006
14 Jun 2006
24 Oct 2006
11 Dec 2006
12 Dec 2006
9 Jan 2007
Transition history
raised
on 3 Jan 2005 by
Mark Baker
accepted
on 24 Jan 2005
Background, proposals, threads, notes
decision
by the WS-Addressing WG
A Worked Example
, by H. Thompson
WS-Transfer and HTTP, re TAG
Issues whenToUseGet-7 &
endPointRefs-47
Action history
SW
accepted on 24 Jan 2005
Inform WS-Addressing WG Chair (
Mark Nottingham
) that we added a new issue and that
we would like to discuss it.
completed on 25 Jan 2005
DO
accepted on 4 Oct 2005
draft something indicating the
issues with EPR and potential
solutions
dropped on 14 Jun 2006
VQ
accepted on 6 Dec 2005
invite Mark Baker to future telcon
to discuss his concern
completed on 28 Mar 2006
nameSpaceState-48
: Adding terms to a namespace [
link to this issue
The question is about the identity of a
namespace, in particular, the xml:
namespace. One perspective is that the xml:
namespace consists of xml:space, xml:lang,
and xml:base (and no other names) because
there was a point in time in which those
where the only three names from that
namespace that had a defined meaning.
Another perspective is that the xml:
namespace consists of all possible local
names and that only a finite (but flexible)
number of them are defined at any given
point in time.
Request
concerning
XML
Discussion history
22 Feb 2005
8 Mar 2005
22 Sep 2005
6 Dec 2005
13 Dec 2005
20 Dec 2005
18 Apr 2006
25 Apr 2006
Transition history
raised
on 9 Feb 2005 by
Norman Walsh
, on behalf of
XML Core WG and XML Coordination Group
accepted
on 22 Feb 2005
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Draft finding from NW
Approved finding
TR version
of the approved finding
agreed
on 25 Apr 2006
Approved TAG finding
The Disposition of Names in an XML
Namespace
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 5 May 2006
Action history
NW
accepted on 22 Feb 2005
NW to announce TAG's acknolwedgement
of issue nameSpaceState-48
completed on 9 Mar 2005
NW
accepted on 22 Feb 2005
NW to work with HT, DO on
namespaceState-48
completed on 13 Sep 2005
TBL
accepted on 8 Mar 2005
provide a draft of new namespace
policy doc (
) and start discussion on www-tag
completed on 25 Apr 2006
New
namespace policy document
published.
NW
accepted on 6 Dec 2005
apply changes to nameSpaceState-48
document and recirculate for
comments
completed on 16 Dec 2005
NW has published a
revised finding
NW
accepted on 3 Jan 2006
make the changes, publish
the finding
, and post to www-tag
completed on 9 Jan 2006
NW has updated and published
The Disposition of Names in an
XML Namespace
schemeProtocols-49
Relationship of URI schemes to protocols and operations
link to this issue
There are many situations in which there
appeared to be confusion in the Web
community regarding the architectural
relationship between URI schemes and network
protocols.
Request
concerning
URI
Discussion history
31 May 2005
15 Jun 2005
28 Jun 2005
4 Oct 2005
5 Dec 2005
26 Sep 2006
23 Jan 2007
Transition history
raised
on 7 Feb 2005 by
Noah Mendelsohn
accepted
on 22 Feb 2005
Background, proposals, threads, notes
URI Schemes and Web Protocols
from Noah Mendelsohn
Action history
NM
accepted on 8 Mar 2005
Noah to send announcment note to
www-tag to announce
SchemesProtocols-49 issue and gather
feedback
completed on 14 Mar 2005
NM
accepted on 23 Aug 2005
Noah to figure out what to do next
on SchemesProtocols-49
completed on 21 Nov 2005
NM
accepted on 5 Dec 2005
produce a new version of
URI Schemes and Web Protocols
. Confirmed
26 Sep 2006
dropped on 23 Jan 2007
URNsAndRegistries-50
: URIs, URNs, "location independent" naming systems and associated registries for naming on the Web [
link to this issue
This issue covers a) URIs for namespace
names b) URNs and other proposed systems for
"location independent" names c) XML and
other registries, and perhaps centralized
vs. decentralized vocabulary tracking.
Request
concerning
URI
RFC 3688
Discussion history
15 Mar 2005
22 Mar 2005
29 Mar 2005
5 Apr 2005
26 Apr 2005
10 May 2005
4 Oct 2005
11 Oct 2005
6 Dec 2005
18 Apr 2006
6 Jun 2006
12 Jun 2006
13 Jun 2006
25 Jul 2006
15 Aug 2006
29 Aug 2006
26 Sep 2006
5 Oct 2006
23 Jan 2007
30 Apr 2007
14 May 2007
30 May 2007
Transition history
raised
on 15 Mar 2005 by
Henry Thompson
accepted
on 15 Mar 2005
Background, proposals, threads, notes
29 Mar 2005:
Draft finding
Action history
HT
accepted on 15 Mar 2005
Note to www-tag to announce
URNsAndRegistries-50
completed on 21 Mar 2005
HT
accepted on 15 Mar 2005
Henry and David to draft initial
finding on URNsAndRegistries-50
completed on 29 Mar 2005
HT
accepted on 18 Apr 2006
Henry and David to update draft
finding
URNs, Namespaces and Registries
. Confirmed
26 Sep 2006
5 Oct 2006
23 Jan 2007
completed on 18 Jun 2007
DO done and HT overtaken by more
recent actions ie.
action to revise
from May 2007 F2F.
DC
accepted on 26 Sep 2006
DanC to find timbl's draft, give it
to Ivan Herman in preparation for
HCLSIG meeting in Amsterdam.
completed on 5 Oct 2006
DC
accepted on 23 Jan 2007
DanC to look for an example of
commercial motivation for
alternatives to DNS.
completed on 30 Apr 2007
DO
accepted on 30 Apr 2007
DO to explore the space of external
registries and to post to the tag
member list.
proposal on 1 May 2007
"XRI Business environment"
email
from David.
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-32
HT
accepted on 11 Jun 2007
Henry to revise URNsAndRegistries-50
finding in response to F2F
discussion.
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-33
standardizedFieldValues-51
Squatting on link relationship names, x-tokens,
registries, and URI-based extensibility
link to this issue
Since short strings are scarce resources
shared by the global community, fair and
open processes should be used to manage
them. A pattern that I'd like to see more of
is
start with a URI for a new term,
if it picks up steam, introduce a
synonym that is a short string thru
a fair/open process.
Lately I'm seeing quite the opposite.
Nearby issues:
uriMediaType-9
URNsAndRegistries-50
XMLVersioning-41
nameSpaceState-48
Request
concerning
URI
namespace
Discussion history
10 May 2005
31 Jan 2006
Transition history
raised
on 6 Apr 2005 by
Dan Connolly
accepted
on 19 Apr 2005
Action history
DC
accepted on 19 Apr 2005
DanC to introduce new issue
standardizedFieldValues-51
completed on 11 May 2005
DC
accepted on 6 Sep 2005
write an update on issue
standardizedFieldValues-51 and
microformat
dropped on 31 Jan 2006
passwordsInTheClear-52
: Sending passwords in the clear [
link to this issue
Many applications send passwords in the
clear. This raises obvious security issues.
The TAG should recommend not to send
passwords in the clear and propose
alternatives.
Request
concerning
Security
Authentication
Discussion history
15 Jun 2005
20 Sep 2005
18 Apr 2006
13 Jun 2006
26 Sep 2006
4 Oct 2006
10 Oct 2006
21 Nov 2006
11 Dec 2006
9 Jan 2007
23 Jan 2007
25 Jun 2007
Transition history
raised
on 18 Apr 2006 by
Dan Connolly
accepted
on 18 Apr 2006
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Discussions at
Sept. 2005 TAG f2f
W3C Workshop on Transparency and
Usability of Web Authentication
public-usable-authentication
mailing list
Draft finding
Passwords in the Clear
Action history
ER
accepted on 18 Apr 2006
Ed to communicate new issue and
produce first draft finding.
Reconfirmed
18 Jul 2006
: publish "No passwords in the
clear" by Aug 8th 2006. Confirmed
26 Sep 2006
completed on 2 Oct 2006
VQ
accepted on 18 Apr 2006
Vincent to open the issue on the
issues list
completed on 19 Apr 2006
ER
accepted on 18 Apr 2006
revise "passwords in the clear" in
light of Vancouver discussion.
completed on 9 Oct 2006
ER
accepted on 10 Oct 2006
publish update in one week for
discussion in two weeks 31st Oct 06.
completed on 13 Nov 2006
ER
accepted on 21 Nov 2006
Produce a new version with these
changes.
completed on 11 Dec 2006
ER
accepted on 11 Dec 2006
Alert Web Security Context Working
Group (chair Mary Ellen Zurko) to
content of passords in clear draft,
to negotiate a review by them, and
to the fact that we are working
toward publication.
completed on 2 Jan 2007
HT
accepted on 9 Jan 2007
Send email about onsubmit hooking
via javascript and its impact on
PWintheclear to www-tag.
completed on 23 Jan 2007
SW
accepted on 25 Jun 2007
Stuart to summarize discussion to
MEZ and make plans for further
progress.
completed on 27 Jun 2007
genericResources-53
: Generic resources [
link to this issue
A generic resource is a conceptual resource
which may stand for something which has
different versions over time, different
translations, and/or different content-type
representations. How should one indicate the
relationship between these?
Request
concerning
Web resources
Discussion history
9 May 2006
30 May 2006
12 Jun 2006
18 Jul 2006
29 Aug 2006
19 Sep 2006
4 Oct 2006
31 Oct 2006
7 Nov 2006
Transition history
raised
on 4 May 2006 by
T. V. Raman
accepted
on 30 May 2006
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Generic Resources
in Design Issues
On Linking Alternative Formats
To Enable Discovery And
Publishing
agreed
on 31 Oct 2006
See TAG finding
On Linking Alternative Representations
To Enable Discovery And Publishing
Acknowledgment cycle
announced by group on 31 Oct 2006
Action history
TVR
accepted on 9 May 2006
Draft a rough finding on Single URI,
Multiple content for review at the
June f2f.
completed on 2 Jun 2006
TVR
accepted on 12 Jun 2006
Revise genericResources draft,
incorporating
resource/representation, complete
2.4.x story better, emphasize
discoverability, incorporate DO's
comments, attempt best practice
draft 3.
completed on 20 Jun 2006
TVR
accepted on 18 Jul 2006
Publish new version of Generic
Resources by Aug 8th 2006
completed on 1 Aug 2006
TVR
accepted on 29 Aug 2006
Produce a new revision of
generic-Resources-53 by 15 Sep 2006
completed on 15 Sep 2006
TVR
accepted on 19 Sep 2006
Produce proposed final
genericResources draft for approval
at Vancouver F2F
completed on 4 Oct 2006
TVR
accepted on 4 Oct 2006
Update Abstract of genericResource
draft, add item about search,
address the rel='generic' question,
deal with the media type issue as
discussed in Vancouver.
completed on 31 Oct 2006
TagSoupIntegration-54
: Tag soup integration [
link to this issue
Is the indefinite persistence of 'tag soup'
HTML consistent with a sound architecture
for the Web? If so, what changes, if any, to
fundamental Web technologies are necessary
to integrate 'tag soup' with SGML-valid HTML
and well-formed XML?
Request
concerning
Web resources
Discussion history
24 Oct 2006
31 Oct 2006
7 Nov 2006
11 Dec 2006
12 Dec 2006
5 Feb 2007
7 Mar 2007
7 Mar 2007
19 Mar 2007
26 Mar 2007
16 Apr 2007
23 Apr 2007
31 May 2007
Transition history
raised
on 17 Oct 2006 by TAG
accepted
on 24 Oct 2006
Background, proposals, threads, notes
Description of new TAG issue
Action history
HT
accepted on 24 Oct 2006
Propose description of
TagSoupIntegration-54
completed on 24 Oct 2006
TVR
accepted on 7 Mar 2007
T.V. Raman to draft initial
discussion material on tag soup for
discussion on 26 March, draft on the
19th or so.
proposal on 20 Aug 2007
Wroking
document
from Boston F2F.
completed on 20 Aug 2007
utf7Encoding-55
: Security issues with incorrect metadata [
link to this issue
Security concerns with browsers sniffing
unlabelled UTF7 encoding
Request
concerning
Security
Metadata
Discussion history
2 Jan 2007
9 Jan 2007
12 Feb 2007
Transition history
raised
on 14 Dec 2006 by
Roy Fielding
accepted
on 2 Jan 2007
Background, proposals, threads, notes
A description of the problem
See also
CVE-2006-5442
Action history
VQ
accepted on 2 Jan 2007
Create issue in list and announce
it.
completed on 4 Jan 2007
abbreviatedURIs-56
: Abbreviating URIs in Web Languages [
link to this issue
Do the expected benefits of
CURIEs
outweigh the potential costs in introducing
third
syntax for identifiers into the languages of
the Web?
This issue continues a thread of discussion
that originated under
ultimateQuestion-42
Request
concerning
CURIE WD 7th March 2007
Henry Thompson's
email
framing the issue.
Transition history
raised
on 30 Mar 2007 by
TAG
accepted
on 2 Apr 2007
Action history
DC
accepted on 2 Apr 2007
DC to respond to
with SPARQL QNames and other
details.
completed on 2 Apr 2007
Transferred to Stuart
SW
accepted on 2 Apr 2007
Look at the difference between QNAME
in XML and SPARQL
[Aside theses are the closest
references the chair was able to
find to the transfer of this action
item]
proposal on 24 Aug 2007
Tracking transferred to tracker
ACTION-34
Maintained by
W3C Technical Architecture Group
Last update: $Date: 2011/08/19 20:30:05 $
This page was generated as part of the
Extensible Issue
Tracking System (ExIT)
2003, 2004
W3C
MIT
ERCIM
Keio
), All Rights Reserved. W3C
liability
trademark
document
use
and
software licensing
rules apply. Your interactions with this site are in accordance with
our
public
and
Member
privacy statements.

TAG Issues List