# Device APIs and Policy Working Group Teleconference

## 01 Sep 2010

[Agenda][3]

See also: [IRC log][4]

## Attendees

Present

    Dzung_Tran, Maria_Oteo, Daniel_Coloma, Dominique_Hazael-Massieux,
Niklas_Widell, Wonsuk_Lee, Ilkka_Oksanen, Thomas_Roessler, Claes_Nilsson,
Richard_Tibbett, John_Morris, James_Salsman, Anssi_Kostiainen

Regrets

    Suresh_Chitturi, Dong-Young_Lee, Marco_Marengo, Eric_Newland,
Wojciech_Masłowski, Laura, _Arribas, Robin_Berjon

Chair

    Robin_Berjon, Frederick_Hirsch

Scribe

    AnssiK

## Contents

  * [Topics][5]

    1. [Administrative, Meetings][6]

    2. [Minutes approval][7]

    3. [Device API Access Control Use Cases and Requirements][8]

    4. [Features][9]

    5. [Device API Features and Capabilities][10]

    6. [Privacy][11]

    7. [Contacts][12]

    8. [Capture][13]

    9. [Calendar][14]

    10. [SysInfo][15]

    11. [Other API status][16]

    12. [Adjourn][17]

  * [Summary of Action Items][18]

* * *

<trackbot> Date: 01 September 2010

<fjh> ScribeNick: AnssiK

### Administrative, Meetings

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

<fjh> WG questionnaire (for all),
[http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/43696/tpac2010dap/][19]

<fjh> TPAC registration (for in-person attendees)
[http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2010reg/][20]

<fjh> March F2F (Seoul, Korea)

<fjh> [http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/43696/seoul-f2f-dates/][21]

<dom> [March Seoul F2F dates results][22]

fjh: 2nd week for March F2F seems to work the best

<fjh> 15-18 March 2011

fjh: when people are ready for a decision on the date?

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: F2F will be 15-18 March 2011

**RESOLUTION: DAP F2F will be on 15-18 March 2011**

### Minutes approval

<fjh> Approve 25 August minutes

<fjh> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/att-0082/minutes-2010-08-25.html][23]

<fjh> proposed RESOLUTION: 25 August minutes are approved

**RESOLUTION: Minutes from 25th August are approved**

### Device API Access Control Use Cases and Requirements

<fjh> Clarify normativeness

<fjh> proposal : [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0107.html][24] (Thomas)

<fjh> and mark sections as informative

<dom> (they are requirements for specs, rather than implementations)

Claes: has looked at other W3C req docs

... the doc should be purely informative

... using uppercase keywords would be confusing

dom: W3C has quite many informative docs with RFC keywords

<fjh> having the keywords adds to clarity of the document

Claes: the doc is stating what we should do

<fjh> when corresponding document goes to Rec then need to show we have met
requirements, indicated by MUST, SHOULDs in requirements document

<jsalsman> which section of [http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/policy-reqs/][25] are
we discussing? the whole thing?

Claes: must decide what we want to spec re access control

<fjh> we are discussing the requirements and how they should be stated

Claes: UC is tricky, must be user friendly, secure

fjh: highlighting the difficulties in the doc is valuable

... the doc will change based on the direction the WG will take

... I'm open to all proposals

Claes: agrees, the doc is in a better shape now

<jsalsman> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0107.html][24] refers to section 3, "Trusted Widget or
Application"

Claes: and it should be published

<fjh> approach is to publish early and often

fjh: mark sections as informative but leave keywords

Claes: would like to hear Google's view

fjh: would prefer to publish early and often

... people will understand it's a draft

<fjh> proposed RESOLUTION: Publish updated WD of Device API Access Control Use
Cases and Requirements on 2 September 2010

fjh: anyone having concerns with publishing?

<fjh> proposed RESOLUTION: Publish updated WD of Device API Access Control Use
Cases and Requirements on 7 September 2010

**RESOLUTION: Publish updated WD of Device API Access Control Use Cases and
Requirements on 7 September 2010**

### Features

<fjh> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0084.html][26]

### Device API Features and Capabilities

<fjh> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0084.html][26]

fjh: involved people are not on the call so let's move on

### 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][27]

<fjh> ACTION-251?

<trackbot> ACTION-251 -- John Morris to review privacy text related to
ISSUE-78 for capture -- due 2010-08-11 -- OPEN

<trackbot> [http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/251][28]

jmorris: will complete the action later

### Contacts

<fjh> IETF/OMA/PoCo/W3C convergence

<richt> Contacts Formats Comparison:
[http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/wiki/ContactFormatsComparison][29] (work in
progress)

<fjh> call scheduled for Friday this week

<fjh> I18N review [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0094.html][30]

richt: Adison Philips(?) suggested i18n WG to look into Contacts API

<fjh> **ACTION:** fjh to prepare Access Control use cases and requirements for
publication [recorded in [http://www.w3.org/2010/09/01-dap-
minutes.html#action01][31]]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-266 - Prepare Access Control use cases and
requirements for publication [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2010-09-08].

[https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ApaQz5_5IF2OdFIxVmxmdlA0YzhUVU1Sc1k1
WnNXTHc&hl=en][32]

<fjh> Anssi notes copy of google spreadsheet similar

<fjh> Anssi suggests creating a link from the wiki to the google document

<dom> ACTION-264:
[http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/wiki/ContactFormatsComparison][29]

<trackbot> ACTION-264 Produce a spreadsheet of sorts showing
overlap/mapping/correspondance between vcard4, poco, cab, and us notes added

<fjh> Rich: wiki allows modification by DAP group

<Zakim> dom, you wanted to comment on I18N request

<dom> dom: would probably useful to point to the I18N guys that the properties
in use in Contacts are still in flux, given the coordination needs

<dom> ... given that these properties are likely to be a focus of the I18N
review

nwidell: how to make a decision, vote?

<richt> richt: we have abstract terms for addresses, names, etc. e.g. the
ability to represent my first name in japanese characters with a translation
to Western characters would apply to any contact format we end up with.

fjh: approach is to look at the facts, do a comparison and it goes from there

... try to avoid voting, cleaner solution preferred

<richt> richt: therefore i18n feedback on the spec at this stage may flush out
these details.

### Capture

<fjh> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0095.html][33]

<fjh> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0100.html][34]

jsalsman: any objections to spec default audio capture type?

<fjh> msg from james -> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0110.html][35]

ilkka: complicated issue, would like to note there are many other audio
formats in the use so not sure if we can agree on a specific codec

... would mean all the implementation should include support for that codec

<fjh> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0102.html][36]

dom: we should highlight that as an issue in the doc, even if we don't go
further with other changes

... what are the audio codecs browsers support today

jsalsman: Speex is open source

fjh: do we want to require a specific codec?

<dom> [let's raise an issue about it, maybe?]

jsalsman: there has not been enough encouragement to do decisions around this
issue

<dom> ISSUE: should we define a default audio (video?) codec for capture? if
so, which?

<trackbot> Created ISSUE-101 - Should we define a default audio (video?) codec
for capture? if so, which? ; please complete additional details at
[http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/101/edit][37] .

fjh: thinks we should raise an issue and add a note in the doc

<dom> ISSUE-101: would need a royaltee-free codec, already widely deployed in
browsers

<trackbot> ISSUE-101 Should we define a default audio (video?) codec for
capture? if so, which? notes added

jsalsman: why not wait a bit before the decision is made?

fjh: proposes jsalsman to send an email to the list

jsalsman: will follow up with an email on ISSUE-101

<fjh> ISSUE-101: [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0102.html][36]

<trackbot> ISSUE-101 Should we define a default audio (video?) codec for
capture? if so, which? notes added

fjh: add a note to the draft, ok?

ilkka: can do that before publishing

jsalsman: anyone having concerns in specing max duration?

... for audio

<fjh> **ACTION:** ilkka to add note to capture draft regarding ISSUE-101
[recorded in [http://www.w3.org/2010/09/01-dap-minutes.html#action02][38]]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-267 - Add note to capture draft regarding ISSUE-101
[on Ilkka Oksanen - due 2010-09-08].

jsalsman: we have that for video already

<jsalsman> I agree with dom that we should have maximum duration specified too

<fjh> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0097.html][39]

<fjh> ilkka: media capture API - need working draft

<dom> +1 to send a CfC for media capture API

ilkka: no pending actions, ready for CfC

<fjh_clone> **ACTION:** fjh to send CfC for media capture API, for next week
[recorded in [http://www.w3.org/2010/09/01-dap-minutes.html#action03][40]]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-268 - Send CfC for media capture API, for next week
[on Frederick Hirsch - due 2010-09-08].

dom: one week for CfC

### Calendar

<fjh> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0097.html][39]

### SysInfo

<fjh> Outstanding editorial and review items - planned completion mid august
(see [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/att-0017/minutes-2010-08-04.html#item05][41] )

<fjh> ACTION-213?

<trackbot> ACTION-213 -- Richard Tibbett to review sysinfo draft after edits
made -- due 2010-07-21 -- OPEN

<trackbot> [http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/213][42]

<fjh> ACTION-243?

<trackbot> ACTION-243 -- Dong-Young Lee to review sysinfo draft after edits
made -- due 2010-08-09 -- OPEN

<trackbot> [http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/243][43]

<fjh> ACTION-214?

<trackbot> ACTION-214 -- Thomas Roessler to request IETF community review of
sysinfo API Last Call WD through W3C/IETF liaison channel -- due 2010-09-21 --
OPEN

<trackbot> [http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/214][44]

jsalsman: only remaining things were typos and such

<dom> [http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source-orientation.html][45]

<fjh> anssiK: what happened move of material to geoloc from sysinfo?

<Dzung_Tran> That was forwarded to geolocation group quite a bit back

<fjh> anssi: do we know when to expect FPWD of this?

### Other API status

fjh: any issues?

<fjh> ACTION-216?

<trackbot> ACTION-216 -- WonSuk Lee to reformulate gallery API to look like
contacts API -- due 2010-07-21 -- OPEN

<trackbot> [http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/216][46]

fjh: anything more to add?

<Claes> Device Orientation spec draft is being discussed at the WG list. Two
DOM events defined: Orientation data as angles in an x, y, z coordination
system and raw accelerometer and gyra data event.

### Adjourn

## Summary of Action Items

**[NEW]** **ACTION:** fjh to prepare Access Control use cases and requirements
for publication [recorded in [http://www.w3.org/2010/09/01-dap-
minutes.html#action01][31]]

**[NEW]** **ACTION:** fjh to send CfC for media capture API, for next week
[recorded in [http://www.w3.org/2010/09/01-dap-minutes.html#action03][40]]

**[NEW]** **ACTION:** ilkka to add note to capture draft regarding ISSUE-101
[recorded in [http://www.w3.org/2010/09/01-dap-minutes.html#action02][38]]


[End of minutes]

* * *

Minutes formatted by David Booth's [scribe.perl][47] version 1.135 ([CVS
log][48])

$Date: 2009-03-02 03:52:20 $

   [1]: http://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_home

   [2]: http://www.w3.org/

   [3]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0111.html

   [4]: http://www.w3.org/2010/09/01-dap-irc

   [5]: #agenda

   [6]: #item01

   [7]: #item02

   [8]: #item03

   [9]: #item04

   [10]: #item05

   [11]: #item06

   [12]: #item07

   [13]: #item08

   [14]: #item09

   [15]: #item10

   [16]: #item11

   [17]: #item12

   [18]: #ActionSummary

   [19]: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/43696/tpac2010dap/

   [20]: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2010reg/

   [21]: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/43696/seoul-f2f-dates/

   [22]: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/43696/seoul-f2f-dates/results

   [23]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/att-0082/minutes-2010-08-25.html

   [24]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0107.html

   [25]: http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/policy-reqs/

   [26]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0084.html

   [27]: http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/210

   [28]: http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/251

   [29]: http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/wiki/ContactFormatsComparison

   [30]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0094.html

   [31]: http://www.w3.org/2010/09/01-dap-minutes.html#action01

   [32]: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ApaQz5_5IF2OdFIxVmxmdlA0YzhU
VU1Sc1k1WnNXTHc&hl=en

   [33]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0095.html

   [34]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0100.html

   [35]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0110.html

   [36]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0102.html

   [37]: http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/101/edit

   [38]: http://www.w3.org/2010/09/01-dap-minutes.html#action02

   [39]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/0097.html

   [40]: http://www.w3.org/2010/09/01-dap-minutes.html#action03

   [41]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-
apis/2010Aug/att-0017/minutes-2010-08-04.html#item05

   [42]: http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/213

   [43]: http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/243

   [44]: http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/214

   [45]: http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source-orientation.html

   [46]: http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/216

   [47]: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm

   [48]: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/