W3C

Device APIs and Policy Working Group Teleconference

25 Aug 2010

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
darobin, fjh, Thomas, dom, Fan_HU, Suresh?, Claes, Suresh, AnssiK, +4871719aaaa, +44.757.091.aabb, richt, wmaslowski, nwidell, ilkka, wonsuk, Robin_Berjon, Frederick_Hirsch, Dzung_Tran, Dong-Young_Lee, Dominique_Hazael-Massieux, Suresh_Chitturi, LauraA, Anssi_Kostiainen, Claes_Nilsson, Wojciech_Maslowski, Richard_Tibbett, Niklas_Widell, Ilkka_Oksanen
Regrets
John_Morris, Erica_Newland, Marco_Marengo, Bryan_Sullivan, James_Salsman
Chair
Robin_Berjon, Frederick_Hirsch
Scribe
Claes

Contents


<trackbot> Date: 25 August 2010

Administrative

<dom> ScribeNick: Claes

<darobin> Scribe: Claes

<fjh> next F2F WG questionnaire and TPAC registration and information

<fjh> WG questionnaire (for all), http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/43696/tpac2010dap/

<fjh> TPAC registration (for in-person attendees) http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2010reg/

<fjh> March F2F questionnaire (Seoul, Korea)

<fjh> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/43696/seoul-f2f-dates/

<dom> [the F2F questionnaire is closing today - should I extend it or do we want to make a resolution today for the dates?]

fjh: Extend it

<dom> (I've updated the questionnaire closing date to next week)

Minutes approval

<fjh> Approve 18 August minutes

<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Aug/att-0064/minutes-2010-08-18.html

RESOLUTION: 18 August minutes approved

Device APIs access control requirements

<fjh> Editorial update completed

<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Aug/0065.html

<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Aug/0072.html

<fjh> http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/policy-reqs/

<scribe> New version August 25

<fjh> proposed RESOLUTION: Publish updated WD of Device API Access Control Use Cases and Requirements on 26 August 2010.

<darobin> [I'm always in favour of publishing]

Dom: Not read new version
... requests time

Robin: Put out CFC before

<dom> ACTION: Dom to review new version of policy-reqs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-259 - Review new version of policy-reqs [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2010-09-01].

RESOLUTION: Issue CFC before publishing updated WD of Access Control Requirements

<fjh> ACTION: fjh put out cfc for policy requirements [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-260 - Put out cfc for policy requirements [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2010-09-01].

fjh: Feel free to propose text for doc

Device API Features and Capabilities

<fjh> Updated, see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Aug/0071.html

<fjh> Next steps - Remove section 2 and publish FPWD

Would like to publish as FPWD

<Zakim> dom, you wanted to ask about getting feedback from Doug/IanF

Dom: Would like to get feedback from Doug Turner and Ian Fette
... No response received yet

<fjh> ACTION: fjh to get feedback from Doug Turner and Ian Fette [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-261 - Get feedback from Doug Turner and Ian Fette [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2010-09-01].

fjh: Would like to get a wider view by publishing

Suresh: Why listing only BONDI and Android?

<dom> [FWIW, +1 on publishing something; but I think we shouldn't miss the opportunity to attract people that have stated interest on this topic]

fjh: Want to get a starting point by informaional text on what we have today, easier to make progress once we have something started

<fjh> ACTION: fjh to clarify in features document to clarify that BONDI and Android material are informative examples and that result will be DAP [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-262 - Clarify in features document to clarify that BONDI and Android material are informative examples and that result will be DAP [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2010-09-01].

Suresh: Want's only DAP features as normative and other stuff as informative

Dom: not complete enough for publishing

<dom> ACTION: Dom to take a stab at DAP features doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-263 - Take a stab at DAP features doc [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2010-09-01].

Privacy

<fjh> ACTION-210?

<trackbot> ACTION-210 -- Alissa Cooper to summarize and add issues to ruleset doc -- due 2010-07-21 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/210

John is not here..

Contacts

Liaisaon from OMA on CAB

<Suresh> Latest version of OMA CAB XDMS spec: http://member.openmobilealliance.org/ftp/Public_documents/COM/COM-CAB/Permanent_documents/OMA-TS-CAB_XDMS-V1_0-20100816-D.zip

OMA suggests that we adopt CAB and that we look for some common subset from CAB, PoCo etc

<AnssiK> this PoCo mapping to others (by Chris Messina) may be useful: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pSGbbhtwI4kN_nJ1GXeQ7Qg

Robin: OMAproposes that we support common fields between these formats
... either adopt complete CAB or subset of common standards

Richard: Lots of overlap

Ansi: PoCo mapping format
... see link above

<dom> Portable Contacts Mapping to other formats/vocabularies (by Chris Messina)

<fjh> richard: is DAP goal to be compliant with OMA or across various formats in the table?

Richard: Our objective? Objective to comply to OMA or to these other formas

Suresh: Option 1: OMAformat, Option 2: DAP provides common fileds and provides mapping table
... prefers Option 2
... we have vCard, PoCo, CAB

<AnssiK> [more PoCo related resources at: http://wiki.portablecontacts.net/Software-and-Services-using-Portable-Contacts]

Suresh: look at suggestion 2
... our main task is API
... look at other formats

Tlr: Do we know the OMA work relates to vCard 4 work?

<dom> (I think a mapping table would help get a better idea of the situation; but I doubt an API floating above vocabularies would be useful)

Suresh: We know that vCard4 was limited.

<darobin> [fwiw I agree with dom — it would be good to fill out that spreadsheet with CAB to see if there's enough overlap for it to be useful ]

Suresh: OMA has mapping between CAB to vCard 2.1

<darobin> [it would be nice to keep the model we have and add a "Mapping to CAB" annex — assuming it's even possible...]

<dom> [As an example, LDAP has defined such an API without a well-defined vocabulary; as a result, interoperability across LDAP clients is nightmarish]

Tlr: How stable?

Suresh: Will be frozen in a week.

Tlr: A bunch of moving parts, Mozilla seems to be bringing PoCo to IETF

<fjh> tlr suggests convergence is happening toward vcard 4, thus would prefer not to specify yet another format

Tlr: hate to see us specify yet another format

<richt> Any public links to PoC dicussions in IETF vCard efforts?

Tlr: we could try to get a relevant people (PoCo, vCard, OMA, us) together, first by an e-mail list

Richt: We have the beginning of some thng converging
... interesting discussion in vCard4. Could we work with them?
... OMA view on vCard4

<fjh> richard asks if OMA is working on supporting vcard4 and when a new version might happen

Suresh: OMAhas mapping towards vCard 2.1 and 3

<Suresh> Suresh: getting all the groups together will be a long shot and the quicker solution would be to stick to common fields across the different formats

Rich: An API comptable with PoCo if vCard4 is aligned and aligned with CAB?

<tlr> -

Robin: Needs a speradsheet as basis for a possible mapping

<AnssiK> +1 to Robin's proposal

Rich: Start with wiki

<darobin> ACTION: richt to produce a spreadsheet of sorts showing overlap/mapping/correspondance between vcard4, poco, cab, and us [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-264 - Produce a spreadsheet of sorts showing overlap/mapping/correspondance between vcard4, poco, cab, and us [on Richard Tibbett - due 2010-09-01].

Robin: we are currently missing information if mapping is at all possible

<richt_> ideally we will endorse THE format - not one format or another :)

<Suresh> The question is as a group do we want to endorse a format?

<richt_> that still requires a lot of work across all the different groups.

Tlr: A spreadsheet will put the discussion on a more informed basis.

<darobin> +1 to talk, but I want the data first!

Tlr: there ought to be some way of achieving convergence
... next step will be to tie together relevant people at a common place

Robin: Great plan

<richt_> +1

<tlr> Badulescu, Blanchet, Celik, Hanson, Smarr, Messina, Daboo

<darobin> ACTION: tlr to send an email to start the Contacts Schema Alignment discussion [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action07]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-265 - Send an email to start the Contacts Schema Alignment discussion [on Thomas Roessler - due 2010-09-01].

Suresh: Wants to participate

Calendaring coordination

<darobin> Robin: any news?

<darobin> tlr: need to figure out if we need to split the call so as to help Koreans, I'm working on it and will dig into it

Tlr: Basic plan to see if we can separate the lunar cal discussion into different tme slot

Messaging

Suresh: Current draft reflects what we discussed in London
... confortable with current draft for the basic use cases

<dom> [err... the draft has already been published as FPWD, right?]

<dom> Messaging FPWD

<darobin> Messaging issues

Robin: Keep coming back to scoping issues
... don't know how to solve them
... want clear use cases for these APIs for the browser use case without policy

<dom> +1 to robin

<dom> ACTION-253?

<trackbot> ACTION-253 -- Suresh Chitturi to make proposals for Contacts and Messaging features in a trusted context due in three weeks -- due 2010-08-31 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/253

Suresh: We might define options for only browsers version widgets
... have a solid API that is browser API and subset for widgets?
... will look at Action -253 next week

Capture

<Suresh> The idea is that we have a full API (for trusted environement) and create a compatible subset that would be targeted for the Browser

Look at privacy text but John not here

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Dom to review new version of policy-reqs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Dom to take a stab at DAP features doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: fjh put out cfc for policy requirements [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: fjh to clarify in features document to clarify that BONDI and Android material are informative examples and that result will be DAP [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: fjh to get feedback from Doug Turner and Ian Fette [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: richt to produce a spreadsheet of sorts showing overlap/mapping/correspondance between vcard4, poco, cab, and us [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: tlr to send an email to start the Contacts Schema Alignment discussion [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/08/25-dap-minutes.html#action07]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.135 (CVS log)
$Date: 2009-03-02 03:52:20 $