[17:55:12] stpeter joins the room
[17:58:50] <stpeter> a few notes from the Bar BoF in progress...
[17:59:08] <stpeter> among other things, only one <content/> allowed
[17:59:23] <stpeter> need to carefully examine the relation of Atom to the web architecture
[18:01:49] <stpeter> perhaps we need an informational best practices document about when to use Atom, how to write extensions, etc.
[18:02:40] <stpeter> some problems in mapping existing applications to the use of Atom
[18:04:08] <stpeter> Mark: there are some interoperability problems
[18:04:23] <stpeter> the basic use cases are typically fine, but not the niceties
[18:04:31] <stpeter> there might be a need for rfc4287bis
[18:06:27] <stpeter> Julian: there are interop problems with AtomPub, too, not just Atom syntax
[18:07:04] <stpeter> Julian: problems with must-ignore
[18:08:34] <stpeter> Julian points to http://incubator.apache.org/chemistry/
[18:10:34] <stpeter> Peter: do we need to just hold an interop meeting and out of that will emerge an issues list?
[18:10:48] <stpeter> Julian notes the desire for hierarchy in AtomPub
[18:13:33] <stpeter> Lisa: I like the idea of an interop meeting as the first step
[18:14:53] <stpeter> (BTW the agenda is at http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/BarBofs/IETF75/Atom such as it is... :)
[18:15:45] <stpeter> some pointers also to http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=cmis
[18:24:21] <stpeter> proposal to submit a hierarchy specification as an experimental I-D
[18:27:37] <stpeter> Lisa: would anyone want to work on an Atom semantic for mailing lists and forums
[18:38:48] <stpeter> seeming consensus not to form a WG at this point
[18:56:41] stpeter leaves the room: Disconnected: connection closed
[19:39:22] stpeter joins the room
[19:54:38] stpeter leaves the room