Kev4) Approve version 1.1rc1 of "XEP-0171: Language Translation"?
http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0171-1.1.html
http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0171/diff/1.0/vs/1.1rc1
MattJ+1
KevI'm OK with this only because Peter's checked with the authors and we believe them to be the only implementors.
KevBut I am OK with it.
linuxwolf+1 also
Kev5) Approve version 1.3rc2 of "XEP-0198: Stream Management"?
http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0198-1.3.html
http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0198/diff/1.2/vs/1.3rc2
MattJ+1
Kev+1 also.
MattJThe only comment I have is that the new paragraph in section 5 threw me for a second
KevOh, I seem to have missed 3)
MattJBut I guess it's technically right
KevLet's do that next :)
linuxwolfwill vote on the list…need to read it again
Kevk
Kev3) Last call on XEP-0266 (Jingle Voice codecs)?
MattJIt's changed already?
stpeterMattJ: there was a comment on the list about that point in 198
MattJthe current vesion says "XEP-0266: Codecs for Jingle Audio"
stpeterright, audio is more than voice
linuxwolf(-:
stpeterI think it captures consensus from the jingle@ list
linuxwolfPedantic Wednesday
stpeterlinuxwolf: ;-)
KevI'm +1 on lastcalling, anyway.
MattJDitto
linuxwolf+1, although there's already some dissent on the standards@ list
stpetersome, or only Arc? ;-)
linuxwolfwell, ok…one (-:
MattJHeh
KevLast call is a chance for such feedback to be heard.
Kev6) Discuss 0220 (Dialback).
stpeterrough consensus -- as they say in the IETF, he might be in the rough
MattJThat's what LC is for
linuxwolftrue, hence my +1 d-:
MattJWhat are the open issues with 220?
linuxwolffeatures
stpeterright
KevDo we have agreement between the authors on this yet?
stpeterwe need to settle on the features stuff
linuxwolfhaha
stpeterI was just poking the Council in case they have opinions in the matter
KevYou know me, I rarely have opinions :D
stpeter:P
MattJNone that I haven't given on-list as an implementor :)
linuxwolfI've already stated mine previously
stpeterok I will follow up on the list, then
MattJThanks
Kev7) Discuss 0299 (Video codecs).
stpeterright
KevMostly just are we happy that this was an editorial change splitting it in two and don't need Council to approve it.
KevWhich I am.
stpeterso I pubilshed that on Sunday without Council approval
stpeterright
stpetermitosis
stpeteror somesuch
linuxwolfit's ok with me
MattJ+1
KevGoodo.
Kev8) Date of next meeting
KevSame bat time, same bat channel?
stpeterWFM
stpeterAOB?
KevHey hey.
KevRemember who's in charge here!
Kev9) AOB.
stpeterI'm wondering if any council members have ideas about how to handle hash agility -- http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2011-June/024599.html
stpeter:P
stpeterI thought next meeting was always the last item on the agenda, my bad
MattJwaqas's approach seems sensible
linuxwolfseems about right to me
stpeterMattJ: I'm wondering if we want to define different elements in special namespaces like urn:xmpp:hashes:sha1 -- that way <sha1 xmlns='urn:xmpp:hashes:sha1'>...</sha1> could be included in any XMPP element
KevI'm happy with leaving SI to wither and fixing this in Jingle, and namespacing the elements seems fine to me.
MattJstpeter, mmm, that's nice
linuxwolfagree with the namespacing
stpeterso we might have a separate document that defies "hash functions for XMPP"
stpeterand it would be revised when we change our recommendations
stpeteretc.
stpetera "living document" if you will
stpeterseem reasonable?
stpeters/defies/defines/ :)
KevWith no time to digest the idea, it doesn't seem unreasonable.
MattJIt would certainly help the current state of ad-hoc hashes included in each XEP
stpeterMattJ: right
stpeterI will look at the different XEPs and perhaps get a protoXEP ready for next week
linuxwolfok
stpeterthat's all from me, I think
KevAnyone else?
stpeterplus if I get it ready quickly, it could be XEP-0300 :)
MattJNay
MattJ:)
KevRight, so I think we're done.
stpeteryep
KevThanks all.
Kevbangs the gavel.
stpeterthank you!
linuxwolfadios
MattJMerci
stpeterKev, it seems that Nathan and Ralph are DNV on 262
stpeterer
stpeterperhaps only Ralph
stpeterererer
stpeteronly Nathan
stpetersigh
stpetertoo much multitasking
stpetercalendar updated to reflect next week's meeting
MattJThanks :)
julmhas joined
stpetersigh
stpeterI've been screwing things up lately
KevTime for a holiday, then.
stpeteryeah right
stpetercase in point: XEP-0171
stpeteretc.
stpeterI'll wait longer on 198 :P
MattJstpeter, what did you screw up with 171?
MattJThe # thing?
MattJIf so, wasn't it really council's job to spot that too? :)
stpeterno, I pushed out 1.1 without waiting for votes from the Council members who weren't able to attend the meeting :(