Subject: Agenda: W3C/IETF liaison call 20 June

From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:13:05 +0200

20 June 2007, 4pm-5:30pm Eastern Time

Meeting:	IETF/W3C Liaison
Chair: 		Thomas
Scribe: 	volunteers welcome
IRC:		irc.w3.org, port 6665, channel #ietf
Bridge:		Zakim +1.617.761.6200, code IETF (4383)

Agenda

1. Convene; pick scribe; bash agenda

2. Link headers; Profile

   Action: Mark Nottingham to talk to ATOMPUB folks about link
   headers
   
   Action: Mark Nottingham, Chris Newman and Ted Hardie to discuss
   adding Profile to the message header registry.

3. Charmod normalization work

   Action: John Klensin to review charmod normalization work ongoing
   in the W3C; Richard Ishida is the W3C contact.

4. Content-coding/transfer-coding values for HTTP -- how to register
   a new one? (Philippe)

5. Current state of HTTP chartering discussions (MNot)

   Strawman charter thread starts here:
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2007AprJun/0118.html

6. XML Security Specs workshop announced (tlr)
   http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/ws/
   
   The workshop will be held on 25/26 September in Mountain View.

7. draft-hartman-webauth-phishing-03 (Lisa)

8. Next meeting

-- 
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <[email-masked]>  +33-4-89063488

---

From: Philippe Le Hegaret <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:38:08 +0000

I would also have one more question: status update on the progress of
the application/wsdl_xml and application/wspolicy+xml media types. I
sent the requests to the IESG on March 6 and 8 and didn't hear anything
back since then. I just want to make sure those are processed.

Philippe

---

From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 17:37:18 +0200

Updated to incorporate the additions from Lisa and Philippe...

Time:		20 June, 4pm Eastern
 
Agenda

2. Link headers; Profile

 

4. XML Schema and Language Tags (Lisa)

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/w3c-ietf-coord/2007Jun/0008.html
   (W3C Team accessible link)
   
   Subject: Fwd: XML Schema and Language Tags
   From: Lisa Dusseault <[email-masked]>
   Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 08:03:11 -0700
   To: W3C/IETF <[email-masked]>
   Message-Id: <[email-masked]> 

5. Progress on application/wsdl+xml and application/wspolicy+xml
   (Philippe)

   Requests were sent to IESG on March 6 and 8

6. Content-coding/transfer-coding values for HTTP -- how to register
   a new one? (Philippe)
 
7. Current state of HTTP chartering discussions (MNot)

8. XML Security Specs workshop announced (tlr)
   http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/ws/

9. draft-hartman-webauth-phishing-03 (Lisa)
 
10. Next meeting

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:20:26 -0400

Thomas,

Have you decided to drop the discussion of the html-email
workshop and topic?  I don't know if there is anything to
discuss immediately -- as Dan pointed out, we don't have anyone
on the call who was at the workshop -- but, having been skimming
the email list and having read the meeting transcript fairly
carefully, my sense is that we might be headed toward a
collision that may need some coordination sooner or later.

The bottom line on the potential conflict was that there seemed
to be an assumption at the workshop and in many of the
discussions that highly ornamented email is that legitimate
email marketers want this, and want it with the full
capabilities of HTML and that we should be figuring out how to
give it to them.   There is at least some sentiment in the IETF
community that many of the things those folks want are risks to
privacy and security -- the ability to embed scripts, to
automatically pull in content that is not part of the message,
to plant bugs that will tell the sender whether messages had
been read and when (it is worth noting that there has been IETF
consensus that sending an acknowledgment to a "read receipt"
request should be optional with the user) and that it is
important that mail systems be able to circumvent or constrain
them.  And, of course, there is some fraction of the IETF
community that believes that "legitimate email marketer" is
either an oxymoron or an euphemism for various rude words.

Chris (Newman) summarized that point of view in at least one
note to the group's mailing list but, as far as I can tell, his
comments were largely ignored.

I don't know that this needs to be on the agenda for this call,
but it is an issue that I think we will jointly need to engage
on sooner or later and that we should not let take us by
surprise.

    john

--On Wednesday, 20 June, 2007 17:37 +0200 Thomas Roessler
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>    Action: Mark Nottingham, Chris Newman and Ted Hardie to
> discuss    adding Profile to the message header registry.
>  
>    Action: John Klensin to review charmod normalization work
> ongoing    in the W3C; Richard Ishida is the W3C contact.
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/w3c-ietf-coord/2007Jun/0008.
> html    (W3C Team accessible link)
>    
>    Message-Id:
> <[email-masked]> 
> 
> 5. Progress on application/wsdl+xml and
> application/wspolicy+xml    (Philippe)
> 
> 6. Content-coding/transfer-coding values for HTTP -- how to
> register    a new one? (Philippe)
>

---

From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 21:04:22 +0200

On 2007-06-20 13:20:26 -0400, John C Klensin wrote:

> workshop and topic?  

I dropped it since Karl is unavailable; he's based in Japan, and the
call is timed even more antisocially for him than it is for me.  I
don't know that any of the other W3C participants on the call have a
good understanding of what happened at the workshop.

> discussions that highly ornamented email is that legitimate email
> marketers want this, and want it with the full capabilities of
> HTML and that we should be figuring out how to give it to them.
> There is at least some sentiment in the IETF community that many
> of the things those folks want are risks to privacy and security
> -- the ability to embed scripts, to automatically pull in content
> that is not part of the message, to plant bugs that will tell the
> sender whether messages had been read and when (it is worth
> noting that there has been IETF consensus that sending an
> acknowledgment to a "read receipt" request should be optional
> with the user) and that it is important that mail systems be able
> to circumvent or constrain them.  And, of course, there is some
> fraction of the IETF community that believes that "legitimate
> email marketer" is either an oxymoron or an euphemism for various
> rude words.

:-)

> comments were largely ignored.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-mail/2007May/0002.html

> but it is an issue that I think we will jointly need to engage on
> sooner or later and that we should not let take us by surprise.

I agree, and wonder a bit what DanC's take is.

As far as I can see from a quick glance through list archives, the
current plan seems to be for Karl to write up a Team Submission,
possibly together with Daniel Glanzmann.  Maybe the most useful next
step is for somebody on this call to talk to Daniel and Karl and
figure out what direction they are leaning into.

Cheers,

---

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:00:25 +1000

Late apologies; bad UI on hotel alarm clock...

--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/