Discussion:
IETF 83 IRI Agenda and Presentations
Chris Weber
2012-03-20 20:29:37 UTC
Permalink
Hello everyone, an initial agenda has been posted and is open to your
feedback:

http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/agenda/agenda-83-iri.txt.

If you'd like to present please upload your materials or send them to me
and I can upload.

Best regards,
Chris Weber
Martin J. Dürst
2012-03-21 07:27:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Weber
Hello everyone, an initial agenda has been posted and is open to your
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/agenda/agenda-83-iri.txt.
Just so it's easier for everybody to comment, I put this inline:

Internationalized Resource Identifiers WG (iri)
AGENDA for IETF 83, Paris, France

Date: FRIDAY, March 30, 2012
Times: 1120-1220 Afternoon Session 1
Chairs: Chris Weber <***@lookout.net>
Area Director: Peter Saint-Andre <***@stpeter.im>
Charter: http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/iri/charter/
Mailing List: public-***@w3.org
Archive: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-iri/
Jabber: xmpp:***@jabber.ietf.org

=========================================================================

* 1 min Scribe selection
* 4 min Agenda bashing
* 5 min WG Status / Overview
* 10 min Guidelines and Registration Procedures for New URI/IRI Schemes
draft-ietf-iri-4395bis-irireg
* 5 min Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs) Comparison
draft-ietf-iri-comparison
* 10 min Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs) BIDI
draft-ietf-iri-bidi-guidelines
* 10 min Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs)
draft-ietf-iri-3987bis
* 10 min Open Floor
* 5 min Closing / Next Steps
Post by Chris Weber
If you'd like to present please upload your materials or send them to me
and I can upload.
Best regards,
Chris Weber
Peter Saint-Andre
2012-03-22 19:29:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Weber
Hello everyone, an initial agenda has been posted and is open to
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/agenda/agenda-83-iri.txt.
Thanks, Martin. I know that Larry wanted to chat about the path forward.

By the way, although Chris will be in Paris for IETF 83, he will need
to leave before our session on Friday, so it seems that I will run the
session.

Peter

- --
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/
Larry Masinter
2012-03-27 06:20:02 UTC
Permalink
The agenda
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/agenda/agenda-83-iri.txt
reasonably gives 10 minutes to talk about the current documents, and
that's always a good idea, but there are some meta topics that
I think we can cover, because the time allotted isn't really long
enough to get into individual issues on documents.


Some things I'd like to cover:

* RFC format: There is ongoing developing some tooling and workflow which will allow us
to generate versions of our internet drafts and RFCs which have HTML and
PDF alternatives. This is an experiment, and important for working group members
who are reviewing documents. It's necessary not only to review the PDF
with Unicode editions, but also (ultimately) the ASCII-only edition in which
the examples are encoded.

10 minutes

* Test cases: I have heard of ongoing developing of IRI test cases, and
hope that we can develop a record of IRI implementations and test
cases.

The IRI documents have been at "Proposed Standard". If we are going to
go to "Internet Standard" (now or later) we need to verify independent
interoperable implementations of EVERY FEATURE.

I'd like to have some discussion about testing.

10 minutes

* 4395bis and Happy Iana
Making registration easier
10 minutes

* "Processing Spec"
Filling the gap between IRI and HTML (in charter, no action)
10 minu
Peter Saint-Andre
2012-03-27 11:19:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Masinter
The agenda
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/agenda/agenda-83-iri.txt
reasonably gives 10 minutes to talk about the current documents, and
that's always a good idea, but there are some meta topics that
I think we can cover, because the time allotted isn't really long
enough to get into individual issues on documents.
I agree that we've been making good progress on most of the documents.
It might make sense to "level set" on each document in case there are
major issues we need to discuss in person.
Post by Larry Masinter
* RFC format: There is ongoing developing some tooling and workflow which will allow us
to generate versions of our internet drafts and RFCs which have HTML and
PDF alternatives. This is an experiment, and important for working group members
who are reviewing documents. It's necessary not only to review the PDF
with Unicode editions, but also (ultimately) the ASCII-only edition in which
the examples are encoded.
10 minutes
That seems out of scope for the IRI WG. However, WG participants might
want to participate in the RFC Format BoF later today.
Post by Larry Masinter
* Test cases: I have heard of ongoing developing of IRI test cases, and
hope that we can develop a record of IRI implementations and test
cases.
The IRI documents have been at "Proposed Standard". If we are going to
go to "Internet Standard" (now or later) we need to verify independent
interoperable implementations of EVERY FEATURE.
I'd like to have some discussion about testing.
10 minutes
That sounds like a good idea.
Post by Larry Masinter
* 4395bis and Happy Iana
Making registration easier
10 minutes
I have no objection to discusion, but I also think that the "happiana"
work is still gelling so it might still be early to change 4395bis
because there's nothing else to align with. IMHO that will change in the
near future (I hope in the next few weeks). However, folks can see
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nottingham-appsawg-happiana/ for
some ideas about where the community is heading.
Post by Larry Masinter
* "Processing Spec"
Filling the gap between IRI and HTML (in charter, no action)
10 minutes
Well worth discussing, I think.

Peter
--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/
Chris Weber
2012-03-29 22:44:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Masinter
* Test cases: I have heard of ongoing developing of IRI test cases, and
hope that we can develop a record of IRI implementations and test
cases.
The IRI documents have been at "Proposed Standard". If we are going to
go to "Internet Standard" (now or later) we need to verify independent
interoperable implementations of EVERY FEATURE.
I'd like to have some discussion about testing.
I completely agree. I posed some questions and suggestions for setting
up testing requirements last July -
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-iri/2011Jul/0038.html and
we'll be sure to add some discussion on this topic at the session.

Best regards,
Chris Weber

Loading...