Re: post-TPAC agenda items for IETF/W3C liaison call

Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org> Mon, 22 November 2010 10:15 UTC

Return-Path: <tlr@w3.org>
X-Original-To: w3c-policy@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: w3c-policy@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 783D128C0F3 for <w3c-policy@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 02:15:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.811
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.811 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.212, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZtLGJVug7DHw for <w3c-policy@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 02:15:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from jay.w3.org (ssh.w3.org [128.30.52.60]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 624AB3A6A63 for <w3c-policy@apps.ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 02:15:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ip-83-99-71-41.dyn.luxdsl.pt.lu ([83.99.71.41] helo=[192.168.2.114]) by jay.w3.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <tlr@w3.org>) id 1PKTS7-0006l0-FD; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 05:16:51 -0500
Subject: Re: post-TPAC agenda items for IETF/W3C liaison call
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
In-Reply-To: <08C0EE68-B245-4836-AFF9-7DBC1BCA7543@mnot.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 11:16:43 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B68CE5D8-6BF7-4867-8605-A6F75199FEBA@w3.org>
References: <05B01025-458E-40D0-B54F-9F3103E0060E@mnot.net> <3C35C07E-9E25-4F9D-BE62-44D5E804BE6C@mnot.net> <1288857104.2553.74.camel@chacal> <4CD27037.4050403@isode.com> <061235D3-D1D0-4D2A-BC65-E6533D086D56@w3.org> <26C94C81-D37D-4A99-990F-AC8E8516D7B4@w3.org> <08C0EE68-B245-4836-AFF9-7DBC1BCA7543@mnot.net>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082)
Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Philippe_Le_H=E9garet?= <plh@w3.org>, w3c-policy <w3c-policy@apps.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: w3c-policy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of w3c-ietf policy issues <w3c-policy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/w3c-policy>, <mailto:w3c-policy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/w3c-policy>
List-Post: <mailto:w3c-policy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:w3c-policy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/w3c-policy>, <mailto:w3c-policy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 10:15:58 -0000

On 22 Nov 2010, at 04:39, Mark Nottingham wrote:

> So everyone is (hopefully) home; should we try for a call before the end of the year?

Yes.  Who has the token?


> Regards,
> 
> 
> On 09/11/2010, at 8:34 PM, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> 
>> Out of the TPAC meeting, we seem to have the following agenda items lined up:
>> 
>> - debrief from Alexey's meeting with the TAG
>> - Larry Masinter's mime info draft
>> - IRI next steps / HTML5 dependency / Barth's draft
>> (though it looks like Adam's draft is now showing up as draft-ietf-something)
>> - http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yao-dnsext-identical-resolution-02
>> impact on IRI? impact on Web? who should review?
>> - IAB/TAG coordination next steps
>> 
>> Not sure how urgent they are. But let's see what else comes up in Beijing.
>> 
>> 
>> On 4 Nov 2010, at 10:25, Thomas Roessler wrote:
>> 
>>> \On 4 Nov 2010, at 09:35, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
>>>>> Alexey, Thomas and I met last night and we went through a list of some
>>>>> pending items:
>>>>> 
>>>>> - hybi: how to sync between the protocol spec and the API spec. It's not
>>>>> to clear how stable the protocol spec is and whether W3C should urge its
>>>>> group to update the API part.
>>>>> 
>>>>> - powder mime type: I agreed to send an update on this front to Alexey.
>>>>> This one has been a long standing one in my TODO list.
>>>>> 
>>>>> - IRI: the group has been productive in the past 6 weeks.
>>>>> 
>>>>> At this point, I don't feel the need to have a call. Thomas might
>>>>> disagree.
>>>>> 
>>>> Actually, let's decide after the IETF in Beijing, in case something new comes up (e.g. more details on HTTP Streaming related discussions).
>>> 
>>> works for me
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Philippe
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 16:32 +1100, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Perhaps obviously, we skipped this one due to lack of interest / availability.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Should we try to schedule one more before the end of the year?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 18/10/2010, at 1:17 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> As discussed at our last call, we're aiming to have our next call the week before W3C TPAC.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> To that end, please fill out the following poll with your preferred times:
>>>>>>> http://doodle.com/z75e2nms6yzv2pye
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
> 
> 
> 
>