W3C

Device APIs and Policy Working Group Teleconference

20 Apr 2011

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Robin_Berjon, Frederick_Hirsch, Kyung-Tak_Lee, Dzung_Tran, Dominique_Hazael-Massieux, Da_Robin_Berjon, Laszlo_Gombos, Suresh_Chitturi, Kangchan_Lee, Bryan_Sullivan, Jonathan_Jeon, Claes_Nilsson, Cathy_Chan
Regrets
Rich_Tibbett, Niklas_Widell, Anssi_Kostiainen
Chair
Robin_Berjon, Frederick_Hirsch
Scribe
Suresh

Contents


<trackbot> Date: 20 April 2011

<scribe> ScribeNick: Suresh

Administrative

No call next week (April 27th)

<fjh> 19-21 July F2F logistics, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-device-apis/2011Apr/0000.html

<fjh> messaging published, http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-messaging-api-20110414/

<fjh> HTML Media Capture, new approach published, http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html-media-capture-20110414/

<fjh> calendar FPWD published, http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-calendar-api-20110419/

<fjh> powerbox/introducer, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2011Apr/0087.html (Tyler)

Minutes approval

<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2011Apr/att-0077/minutes-2011-04-13.html

RESOLUTION: Minutes from 13 April 2011 are approved

Charter Draft

<fjh> Last request for review and proposed changes, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2011Apr/0085.html

<fjh> Proposed charter (revised) http://www.w3.org/2010/11/DeviceAPICharter.html

Suresh: are we looking at getting members to join the DAP, given that we have it in the charter?

Dom: If we do not have them in the group, we will have to revise the charter

fjh: on the process, is there caught during the AC review?

Dom: yes, I would bring this up during the reveiw

Suresh: i would prefer that we resolve this before we approve the charter

dom: Claes, do you have any update on your co-editors?

Claes: They are aware of the problem

bryan: we are going to have similar concerns with other API, such as sensors API, if we don't get Google hre are we going to get blocked?

fjh: it is legitimate...the members need to be aware of this

dom: web intents/introducer can be done in a number of ways, but if we couldn't due to IPR issues....we have to look into it
... re sensors, i don't believe there is a risk, but having google is good

fjh: what you are saying is charter is general enough...and doesn't commit the group to work on them

bryan: the point is that we have changed the charter to get a broad membership....i'm not sure on the IPR implications
... if they don't get involved not sure how far we can go...

fjh: should be make a formal decision on the charter?

dom: i think we should take a resolution

<fjh> WG can approve draft charter with resolution and understanding that AC will review and discuss IPR/membership issues

Suresh: it is subject to the discussion we just had...do we take these issues at the AC level or at the group level

robin: we should take it at the AC level
... from the group's view, we are proposing the topics and the legal issues should be handled at the AC level

<darobin> kyungtak, there's a lot of noise when you're not muted

<bryan_sullivan> On the earlier point re Web Introducer: In the rechartering we are trying to create an environment attractive to participation of the browser vendors. Hopefully actions are taking place in the background to make that happen. Basing DAP APIs on APIs of non-members is problematic, maybe even if just based upon patterns (but hopefully not). This goes for Web Introducer and Sensor as well. At this point there is an available API draft

<bryan_sullivan> (http://bondi.omtp.org/1.5/PWD-2/sensor.htm) which is RF (as part of the BONDI project). I would like to consider the Google APIs as patterns or baselines but we need Google's involvement in the group to move forward on that, IMO.

kyungtak: have some comments

dom: it might be better to take the comments at the AC review

kyungtak: will submit the comments on the mailing list

<fjh> share any comment on the public mailing list, but at this point to be treated as part of AC review

<dom> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: The Working Group requests to be rechartered under the new draft charter at http://www.w3.org/2010/11/DeviceAPICharter.html

fjh: not sure how we want to raise the concerns in the group in additon to this resolution

dom: the charter will accompany a "activity proposal" where i can state the concerns

<dom> ACTION: Dom to start DAP rechartering process [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/20-dap-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-388 - Start DAP rechartering process [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2011-04-27].

RESOLUTION: The Working Group requests to be rechartered under the new drfat charter at http://www.w3.org/2010/11/DeviceAPICharter.html

Battery Status Event

robin: The CfC ends today, any concerns?

<fjh> Minor edit could be handled during publication

fjh: there was comment on the list....

<dom> +1

<fjh> +1

<darobin> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Publish Battery

robin: this can be handled later

<darobin> ACTION: Robin to handle FPWD of Battery [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/20-dap-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-389 - Handle FPWD of Battery [on Robin Berjon - due 2011-04-27].

RESOLUTION: Publish FPWD of Battery Status specification

Network Connection

robin: we have a draft in CVS

<darobin> http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/netinfo/

<fjh> update, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2011Apr/0064.html (Suresh)

<fjh> feedback, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2011Apr/0086.html

robin: there are a few comments

Suresh: 3 open issues, roaming, 'online' vs 'networkChange' event, and changing "unsigned short" to 'short"

robin: is roaming a real concern?

dom: does it create a privacy concern/phishing attack?
... it may be sufficient to note that it is under discussion

Suresh: 'online' is totally different from the semantics, we should not resue it becasue an implementation uses it

bryan: agree
... we should tell what network you are on, and determination of roaming is implementation specific

suresh: this is exactly the proposal in the draft, i.e not to have roaming

but instead just have fields to indicate the current and home n/w

<darobin> proposed idea from bryan_sullivan: use a single networkName field that gives the mobile network identifier on mobile networks, the SSID on wifi, etc.

<bryan_sullivan> +1

<bryan_sullivan> mnc, mcc are important for PLMN

<bryan_sullivan> ssid for WIFI

<dom> (I would have strong privacy concerns in providing freely WIFI SSIDs)

<darobin> (me too, but if we have a working technical solution we can at least agree on what we'll drop over privacy concerns :)

<fjh> sharing SSID is a bad idea from privacy perspective, isn't it

dom: raises concerns on exposing SSID

bryan: generally WiFi is a flat rate service...and may not be as important

<darobin> [can we 1) agree to a few changes to make, 2) to flag a number of issues, and 3) ship a CfC for that?]

<dom> +1 to darobin

+1

robin: document issues, (type: short vs srting), add event, and a flag to note the network name

<darobin> ACTION: Robin to make the mentioned changes and push out a CfC [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/20-dap-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-390 - Make the mentioned changes and push out a CfC [on Robin Berjon - due 2011-04-27].

HTML Media Capture

We published the draft and sent a msg to HTML for feedback, response from Ian Hickson questioning the new addition

dom: Mozilla provided comments as well....some work under way

robin: re Ian, we can point to previous discussion on this

<dom> ACTION: Dom to look at overlap between MediaFileData and HTMLVideoElement [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/20-dap-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-391 - Look at overlap between MediaFileData and HTMLVideoElement [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2011-04-27].

Calendar

<fjh> comments on publication, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2011Apr/0096.html

robin: take them offline

Messaging

dom: a comment that prefers the previous version of the API

Other Business

no call next week

<fjh> Next call in 2 weeks, 4 May.

<dom> ACTION: Dom to create F2F registration for Paris meeting [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/20-dap-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-392 - Create F2F registration for Paris meeting [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2011-04-27].

Adjourn

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Dom to create F2F registration for Paris meeting [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/20-dap-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Dom to look at overlap between MediaFileData and HTMLVideoElement [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/20-dap-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Dom to start DAP rechartering process [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/20-dap-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Robin to handle FPWD of Battery [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/20-dap-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Robin to make the mentioned changes and push out a CfC [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/20-dap-minutes.html#action03]
 
[End of minutes]

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