Friday, 29 July 2011< ^ >
stpeter has set the subject to: IRI WG | IETF Note Well applies
Room Configuration

[12:24:34] Bjoern joins the room
[16:34:59] cweber joins the room
[16:51:03] jre joins the room
[16:51:17] <jre> Tag, Björn.
[16:53:58] <jre> ahhh, elevator music in the meeting room
[16:58:47] jre is now known as Julian
[16:59:03] yone joins the room
[17:01:16] Julian thinks bad-attitude should be projected
[17:06:47] stpeter joins the room
[17:08:46] <cweber> the last session of the week, your in the home stretch!
[17:09:16] behnam joins the room
[17:09:18] <stpeter> thanks!
[17:11:16] <Julian> music is gone over here
[17:11:43] <cweber> still playing for me :P
[17:11:43] <Julian> I don't hear any music anymore
[17:11:56] monroe1059 joins the room
[17:12:08] <monroe1059> hello IRI WG!
[17:12:54] <cweber> did we find a scribe?
[17:17:46] <Julian> where's Adam?
[17:18:54] <behnam> hi. are the slides available online?
[17:19:21] <Julian>
[17:19:28] tonyhansen joins the room
[17:19:38] <cweber>
[17:19:49] <cweber> slides are under IRI early down the page
[17:20:02] <cweber> overview:
[17:20:13] <cweber> irireg:
[17:20:24] <cweber> regexp:
[17:20:25] sm joins the room
[17:20:52] <behnam> thanks
[17:21:26] <tonyhansen>
goes directly to the IRI docs
[17:30:45] <Julian> MIC: if we take out processing-for-HTML and BIDI from 3987bis, I think the remaining stuff should be simple
[17:31:14] tonyhansen leaves the room
[17:31:30] tonyhansen joins the room
[17:32:29] <yone> Guidelines and Registration Procedures for New URI/IRI Schemes
[17:33:16] sm leaves the room
[17:33:51] sm joins the room
[17:37:42] <Julian> +1 to what Larry said
[17:39:38] joins the room
[17:42:40] <stpeter> Julian: I didn't relay your text, but the chatroom is on the screen now so we've received your input
[17:45:08] josephyee joins the room
[17:45:14] sm leaves the room
[17:45:40] sm joins the room
[17:46:51] sm leaves the room
[17:47:22] sm joins the room
[17:48:48] <stpeter> result... remove that sentence about scheme-specific length restrictions
[17:50:02] josephyee leaves the room
[17:55:47] Julian is ready
[17:55:59] <stpeter> thanks Julian
[17:56:05] <stpeter> cweber: you can make comments here
[17:56:07] <cweber> Julian's slides:
[17:56:51] josephyee joins the room
[17:57:14] tonyhansen leaves the room
[18:01:52] <> There's a simple parser for extracting the scheme
[18:01:59] <> the scheme then indicates how to parse the rest
[18:02:00] tonyhansen joins the room
[18:02:06] <> it's not a circular depedency
[18:04:21] <> (i'm abarth)
[18:04:39] <> that doesn't work for all schemes in practice
[18:04:51] <Julian> yes, it does
[18:05:02] <> :)
[18:09:25] <stpeter> opinions?
[18:09:36] <> your real customer here is the HTML working group
[18:09:48] <> if they're happy with julian's draft, then you're probably ok
[18:10:47] Julian waves
[18:10:50] <cweber> they're inline with the overview
[18:10:59] <cweber> weber's draft:
[18:12:26] <Julian> omg; I should have mentioned I'm *not* volunteering to solve this problem alone :-)
[18:16:17] <Julian> ...or work to fix the UAs.
[18:16:49] <cweber> :D
[18:18:04] <Julian> I'm still listening!
[18:20:31] <Julian> I'm willing to contribute
[18:20:51] <Julian> but document needs to be owned by somebody else if it gets bigger
[18:26:23] <stpeter> Julian: I'm going to hand things to Larry
[18:28:45] <stpeter> #1 move to RW (Reschke/Weber) spec?
[18:29:38] <stpeter> #2 to RW?
[18:31:26] <Julian> I think I need to clarify that I was trying to show a possible way to do things, not to become the author of that draft -- it really depends on the scope.
[18:33:05] <stpeter> #3 to RW
[18:35:37] <stpeter> Yngve says +!
[18:35:40] <stpeter> +1 even
[18:39:03] <stpeter>
[18:41:43] <stpeter> #13 needs discussion
[18:41:53] <stpeter> #5 and #6 to be closed by Larry
[18:42:21] Marc Blanchet joins the room
[18:42:52] <Marc Blanchet> currently looking at :
[18:43:35] <stpeter> #14 needs discussion
[18:44:13] <Marc Blanchet> now:
[18:47:08] behnam leaves the room
[18:48:51] <Julian> understood
[18:51:20] hildjj joins the room
[18:51:28] <stpeter> #22: split out normalization and canonicalization into a separate spec? people to review and discuss on the list
[18:51:45] <stpeter> (Larry's preference would be to split it out)
[18:54:29] <stpeter> Yngve points out that care must be taken if different clients or applications apply different normalization and canonicalization algorithms
[18:56:19] <Marc Blanchet>
[18:56:31] <cweber> I think Larry nailed it and there will need to be conservative and liberal equivalence algorithms, conservative/strict where security matters
[18:57:31] <Julian> there we go again :-)
[18:57:37] <Julian> but agreed
[18:58:14] <cweber> hahaha :)
[18:59:27] <stpeter> #24 to RW
[19:01:39] <Julian> "#24 to those-who-aren't-in-the-room"
[19:03:34] hildjj leaves the room: Disconnected.
[19:03:47] <Julian> will do
[19:04:52] leaves the room
[19:05:06] yone leaves the room
[19:05:48] sm leaves the room
[19:06:14] stpeter leaves the room
[19:07:25] Marc Blanchet leaves the room
[19:07:29] Julian leaves the room
[19:07:54] monroe1059 leaves the room
[19:22:35] Bjoern leaves the room
[19:25:40] cweber leaves the room
[20:39:10] josephyee leaves the room
[20:57:15] tonyhansen leaves the room
[21:52:28] tonyhansen joins the room
[23:36:22] hildjj joins the room
[23:49:38] hildjj leaves the room: Disconnected.
[23:50:22] hildjj joins the room
[23:56:33] hildjj leaves the room: Replaced by new connection.
[23:56:35] hildjj joins the room
Powered by ejabberd Powered by Erlang Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Valid CSS!