- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 17:44:41 -0400
- To: public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Available at
https://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html
Text version:
HTML editors
05 Apr 2016
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-irc
Attendees
Present
chaals, plh, steveF, alexD, Leonie, Travis, Arron
Chair
chaals
Scribe
plh
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]timeline
2. [5]Interop testing
3. [6]Bug Triage
4. [7]Getting up to speed
5. [8]Next meeting
* [9]Summary of Action Items
* [10]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
timeline
Chaals: goal is to ship a REC within this charter
... which means PR in August
... and CR by mid-June to run the patent clock
... so 2 variables
... do we get enough stuff done by then?
... and do we get consensus from the WG?
... the approach is:
... lots of changes: ficaption, summary, etc.
... things that didn't make into HTML 5
... we'd like to improve editorially as much as we can
Steve: can we change tyhings during CR period?
Chaals: yes, but we assume we'll have a branch
... and we'll leave it alone at that point
... and do changes on 5.2
Steve: so CR by mid-June. this gives us 2 months
Chaals: yes
... we won't get everything we'd like by then
Steve: when do we identify things to be pulled out?
Chaals: I'm going to start later tonight Call for Consensus
... but if things don't work, they should go
... like outline stuff
... accesskey
... this dooesn't work
Steve: accesskey attribute?
Chaals: no the changes between html 4 and html 5 are all
fantasy
... html 5 stuff should be reverted
Steve: re outline algo
... it's no problem sitting since he doesn't have requirements
... but it needs better explanation
... and needs to be broken out
... [...]
Chaals: if it's an element that never got implemented, we just
pull it out
... we might need call for consensus for some
... substantive changes should be justified
... and be accompanied by tests
Alex: what about updates to the WD?
Chaals: montly
... next update is next week
PLH: WOuld like to take the snapshot Friday for publication
CMN: Seems fair, I'll shoot for Friday then.
Plh: I'll take whatever is in the repo on Friday then
Interop testing
Chaals: approach is that we want tests to justify changes
... HTML 5.0 got through an interop test
... if all the changes that we make come with tests, that
should be a no brainer to go back to the Director
... while I would like to have tests for the testharness, it's
not a requirement
... just a nice to have
... so manual tests are fine
... in the long term, we'll keep doing better
Leonie: is there any template or structure for tests?
Chaals: yes
... testharness
Plh: I'm happy to help
<scribe> ACTION: plh to organize a testharness teaching session
[recorded in
[11]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action01]
[11] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action01]
Chaals: anounce it to public-html
Plh: I'll organize a doodle poll
Charles: does the testing plan make sense to you?
Plh: yes, as long as we cut out features that are not
implemented enough
Charles: agreed. nothing should stop us from being ruthless
Leonie: do we have a list of things to remove?
Charles: I have 4
Travis: +1 to cut
Alex: what's our bar? 2 browsers
Steve: are we going to vary from the HTML5 exit criteria?
... it was 2 rendering engines
Travis: it was passive permissive
... because it was widely deployed
Chaals: other parts have not been tested and were never
implemented
... so a c ouple of engines
... but there is no general rule at W3C
... having implementers swearing they'll do it might be
convincing
<SteveF> exit criteria for html5
[12]https://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/public-permissive-
exit-criteria.html
[12]
https://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/public-permissive-exit-criteria.html
Chaals: but having implementers saying they'd like to remove
it, might make it the other way
<chaals> "is sufficiently clear, complete, and relevant to
market needs, to ensure that independent interoperable
implementations of each feature of the specification will be
realized"
Steve: we need to have those rules written down
... why not just reused the ones from HTML5?
... and do a Call for Consensus to use that again
Plh: to give a little background on the criteria
... the goal was to use passive permissive for old html4
features, like tables
... and make sure we had tests for the new HTML 5.0 features
... but some things fell into cracks, like mediaGroup
... we would have never shipped mediaGroup in HTML 5.0 if we
had realized it wasn't implemented.
<Zakim> chaals, you wanted to say yeah, let's make something
based on those criteria
<LJWatson> +1 to public permissive v3 exit criteria
Chaals: If we make these requirements part of the acceptance
for each change, then when we enter CR, we don't need to spend
a month writing a full test report
Steve: we've got to have something to define our criteria
... because people we'll be asking questions
... reusing the ones from HTML 5.0 means the work is already
done for us
... if we spit up the spec and flag things up for removal...
Arron: I have a tool that can run through the APIs in the spec
... how about I create issues on those who don't have 2
implementations?
... I'll raise issues
[All: +1]
Arron: I hope to have the info in the next 2 or 3 minutes. it's
a public tool
<arronei> [13]http://aka.ms/apicatalog/
[13] http://aka.ms/apicatalog/
Chaals: I'll setup a call for consensus to the Group for the
exit criteria
<scribe> ACTION: Charles to get the Group to decide on the HTMl
exit criteria [recorded in
[14]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action02]
[14] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action02]
<chaals> ACTION: Chaals to CfC on "exit criteria" as a
requirement for accepting any change [recorded in
[15]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action03]
[15] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action03]
<scribe> ACTION: Arron will enter issues based on API
implementation feedback [recorded in
[16]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action04]
[16] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action04]
Bug Triage
Chaals: we cleaned out the a11y bugs and give action items away
... but there are a bunch of other bugs from bugzilla
... how do we triage github issues?
<LJWatson>
[17]http://github.adrianba.net/webstandards/HTML5-bugs.htm
[17] http://github.adrianba.net/webstandards/HTML5-bugs.htm
Plh: asking the editors to sort out which bugs are 5.1 would be
good
<scribe> ACTION: Plh to create a milesone 5.1 in the repo
[recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action05]
[18] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action05]
Travis: what happened to the issues we don't migrate?
Chaals: they'll disapear over time
Travis: incubator group project?
Chaals: yes. the bugs might come back again however
Leonie: let's finish the a11 bugs this week
... and see where we are after that
Arron: we'll look into organizing a bug triage call
Getting up to speed
Chaals: do you feel in control?
... or need help in figuring things out?
Travis: curious how we get the commmunity involved in
discussing the issues
... we could divolve into a benevolent editor situation but we
should be more inclusive
... how do we say that an issue needs someone to look into it?
... does it jump out of the incubation group?
Chaals: we have a label for question for the WG in github
... and we need to practice that
... once we start doing that, we'll need a tradition of
answering :)
... the WhATWG spec is removing a lot of semantic elements
Steve: was an Aprils' fools
Chaals: yes
Steve: to get the Group involved, we'll need to write to them
Plh: weekly report? Twitter?
Travis: I'd like to ask people in the trenches
Plh: we can use the w3c twitter account
Steve: and point people to the github issue
[19]https://twitter.com/htmlwg
[19] https://twitter.com/htmlwg
Steve: we can build it up
<scribe> ACTION: plh to find who has access to @htmlwg
[recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action06]
[20] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action06]
Chaals: linking stuff in bikeshed
... seems black art to me
Arron: I know how to link things
Alex: getting the community involved is important and getting
things on github is also good rather than email
Chaals: formal comments need to be put into GitHub
Next meeting
April 26, same time 2000 Zulu
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Arron will enter issues based on API
implementation feedback [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Chaals to CfC on "exit criteria" as a requirement
for accepting any change [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Charles to get the Group to decide on the HTMl
exit criteria [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Plh to create a milesone 5.1 in the repo
[recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: plh to find who has access to @htmlwg [recorded
in [25]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: plh to organize a testharness teaching session
[recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action01]
[21] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action04
[22] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action03
[23] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action02
[24] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action05
[25] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action06
[26] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action01
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2016 21:44:44 UTC