W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2010

[widgets] Draft minutes from 8 April 2010 voice conf

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 10:14:44 -0400
Message-Id: <D15367CE-08DE-4792-BB74-FA152C98A95D@nokia.com>
To: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the April 8 Widgets voice conference are  
available at the following and copied below:

  http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-wam-minutes.html

WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send  
them to the public-webapps mail list before April 15 (the next  
Widgets voice conference); otherwise these minutes will be considered  
Approved.

-Art Barstow

    [1]W3C

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

                                - DRAFT -

                        Widgets Voice Conference

08 Apr 2010

    [2]Agenda

       [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/ 
2010AprJun/0035.html

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-wam-irc

Attendees

    Present
           Art, Marcos, Frederick, Kenneth, Josh, Arve, Thomas,
           Wonsuk_Lee, Robin, Doug

    Regrets
           StevenP

    Chair
           Art

    Scribe
           Art

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Review and tweak agenda
          2. [6]Announcements:
          3. [7]Widget Digital Signature spec
          4. [8]WARP spec
          5. [9]P&C spec
          6. [10]View Modes Media Feature spec
          7. [11]View Modes Interfaces spec
          8. [12]Widget Update spec
          9. [13]AOB
      * [14]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________

    <scribe> Scribe: Art

    <scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

Review and tweak agenda

    AB: the draft agenda was posted yesterday (
    [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/00
    35.html ). Any change requests? If we have time today, during the
    AOB topic, I'd like to discuss publishing a new WD of the Widget
    Update spec.

      [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/ 
2010AprJun/0035.html

    FH: want to talk about DigSig and WARP

    AB: we can re-arrange the topics

Announcements:

    AB: any short announcements?

Widget Digital Signature spec

    AB: yesterday Frederick submitted a revised Change Request (
    [16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/00
    28.html ) for the C14N bug we briefly discussed last week. Any
    comments or concerns about this CR?

      [16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/ 
2010AprJun/0028.html

    [ no ]

    AB: this CR will affect existing implementations. Thus the spec will
    need to return to Last Call WD.

    FH: the feedback I got is that it is OK

    MC: I think it is OK; thanks for doing this FH

    FH: I discussed this with TLR
    ... and with people within Nokia
    ... internal feedback and TLR feedback is OK
    ... don't think we have an backward compat harm
    ... I think we should adopt it since it will help prevent future
    interop issues

    TR: have we had review from other implementors?
    ... e.g. Bryan Sullivan

    FH: I haven't seen anything from Bryan

    TR: who do we expect impl report and what have they said

    MC: I expect Opera to implement; BONDI may have has already
    implemented

    TR: 2nd question - there was another comment on the list
    ... about optionality here re c14n

    FH: I think the revised text addresses this concern
    ... I responded to Andreas on the list
    ... don't think we want too many options
    ... it just leads to interop problems

    <tlr> Ah, I had overlooked this file: "A ds:Reference that is not to
    same-document XML content

    <tlr> MUST NOT have any ds:Transform elements."

    MC: the feedback we get is that we don't want to do c14n on XML
    lines within the widget

    FH: I think MC's argumentation is stronger since it is based on
    implementor feedback

    AB: this CR will affect existing implementations. Thus the spec will
    need to return to Last Call WD.

    FH: yes, it will affect implementations

    AB: proposed RESOLUTION: the group agrees FH's Widget DigSig Change
    Request should be applied
    ... any objections?

    FH: do we need to deal with BONDI explicitly?

    AB: I think we have given everyone sufficient time to respond
    ... any objections to the proposed resolution?

    [ none ]

    RESOLUTION: the group agrees FH's Widget DigSig Change Request
    should be applied

    <scribe> ACTION: frederick update the Widget DigSig spec to reflect
    the CR [recorded in
    [17]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-wam-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-519 - Update the Widget DigSig spec to
    reflect the CR [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2010-04-15].

    RB: yes, I support this CR

    AB: we need to record consensus to publish the new LCWD
    ... proposed RESOLUTION: the group agrees to publish a new LCWD of
    the Widget Digital Signature spec
    ... any objections?

    [ no ]

    RESOLUTION: the group agrees to publish a new LCWD of the Widget
    Digital Signature spec

    AB: review period: I think we should go for the 3-week minimum. OK?

    <darobin> +!

    <fjh> +1

    <darobin> +1

    AB: any object to a 3-wk review period?

    [ no ]

    <fjh> +spot

    <darobin> +his arse

    AB: other than the XML Security WG, is there any other WG we want to
    ask to review the new LC?

    FH: I'd like people to review my change
    ... let's shoot for a April 15 pub
    ... I can make the ED changes today

    AB: great

    <scribe> ACTION: barstow notify the WG after FH adds the CR to the
    ED [recorded in
    [18]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-wam-minutes.html#action02]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-520 - Notify the WG after FH adds the CR
    to the ED [on Arthur Barstow - due 2010-04-15].

    AB: Frederick, please apply Action-508 "Widget DigSig spec: make
    sure references to XML Sig 1.1 are updated" (
    [19]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/508 )

      [19] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/508

    <fjh> not Candidate Req but change request

    FH: sure, I will do that

    AB: anything else on dig sig for today

    FH: after the ED is done, I do pub rules

    AB: after it passes pubrules, notify me
    ... anything else on DigSig for today?

WARP spec

    AB: Robin, please check Action-511 "Check if WARP spec should use
    RFC2181 instead of RFC1034" based on a comment from Yves (
    [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/511 )
    ... Robin completed the WARP LC disposition of comments (DoC)
    document several weeks ago. Today we want to approve this document (
    [21]http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/WD-widgets-a
    ccess-20091208/doc/ ).
    ... any issues with this WARP DoC document?

      [20] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/511
      [21] http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/WD- 
widgets-access-20091208/doc/

    [ no ]

    AB: last week we discussed advancing the WARP spec to Candidate
    Recommendation. Does anyone have any concerns about that?
    ... proposed RESOLUTION: the group agrees to publish the WARP spec
    as a Candidate Recommendation
    ... are there any objections to that?

    <darobin> +1

    AB: or voices of support?

    RB: support

    MC: support

    RESOLUTION: the group agrees to publish the WARP spec as a Candidate
    Recommendation

    <scribe> ACTION: barstow schedule a Director's call to publish a CR
    of the WARP spec [recorded in
    [22]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-wam-minutes.html#action03]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-521 - Schedule a Director's call to
    publish a CR of the WARP spec [on Arthur Barstow - due 2010-04-15].

    AB: Robin, you'll need to attend
    ... anyone else want join?

    DS: I should be there

    AB: anything else on WARP for today?

P&C spec

    AB: this topic is intended to review the latest comments the I18N
    Core WG has re Marcos' latest proposal (
    [23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/00
    21.html ). But I haven't seen any recent replies.

      [23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/ 
2010AprJun/0021.html

    <Marcos> fjh, I can help you with processing the doc

    MC: I haven't seen anything more from them

    AB: should we start the process of moving this spec to PR?

    MC: we won't be able to show ITS support

    AB: my take on this issue from previous discussions, is that SteveP
    has indicated we don't need to have implementations but able to show
    it can be implemented

    MC: I thought we need the test and a screen shot it had been
    implemented
    ... I don't think having tests is enough

    DS: technically, think you just need to show it can be implemented

    MC: I've implemented it in JS

    DS: some people think the impls must be in real products

    MC: this functionality was a MAY
    ... we only added it to satisfy the I18N community
    ... we never had impl support for it

    AB: so is this functionality optional

    MC: no, it is part of the language

    DS: I think Steven is correct to pass PR

    MC: we have the tests
    ... we need Robin's impl
    ... and with Opera we can show some screenshots
    ... think wookie is going to implement

    AB: are these tests part of the core test suite or off on the side?

    MC: off on the side

    AB: is this going to affect Implementation Report we already have?

    MC: we will leave these out
    ... and put them in a separate impl report

    AB: I think that's OK
    ... and it can be a really simple report
    ... so until we have the screenshots and impls, we can't go to PR

    MC: that's right

    <darobin> [I have no idea at all]

    AB: any timeframe for screenshots or implementations?

    <darobin> ["weeks"]

    MC: no, not at this point; could be in a few weeks

    AB: are there any other action items re P&C spec?
    ... can we go from CR to CR?

    DS: no, must go thru LC

    <darobin> [straight to PR!]

    AB: OK, so we continue to sit in CR until we have at least 2
    implementation reports of the <span> and dir atrribute

    DS: if you know you have to wait, it could be more efficient to go
    back to LC

    AB: thanks for that input

View Modes Media Feature spec

    AB: ED is: [24]http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-vmmf/
    ... what is the status of responding to comments, updating the spec?

      [24] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-vmmf/

    RB: I expect to make progress today

    AB: great
    ... anything you need from the rest of us?

    RB: nothing now

    AB: anything else for VMMF?

    KC: think chrome definition needs some work

    <darobin> [send an issue :)]

    KC: as I said on the list

    RB: I will go through all of the emails; won't miss it

    KC: sounds good

View Modes Interfaces spec

    AB: Kenneth proposed to rename ViewModeChanged to ViewModeChange (
    [25]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/00
    02.html ). Any comments on this proposal?

      [25] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/ 
2010AprJun/0002.html

    <darobin> +1

    JS: need to look at what HTML does
    ... have onMouseDown
    ... and similar

    <timeless_mbp> OnViewChange

    JS: could argue for onViewChange

    KC: onWidgetModeChange

    <kenneth> yes

    <kenneth> I think opera uses onwidgetmodechange

    JS: not sure we want to use that triple
    ... also pretty sure we do not want to include the term "widget"

    <kenneth> the problem with onviewchange is that it didnt change to
    another view

    <kenneth> include?

    JS: perhaps "presentation" is better
    ... could look for prior usage of it
    ... onPresentationChange or onRepresentationChange

    <timeless_mbp> I'm done :)

    <kenneth> i got dropped from the call wait

    AB: if people have counter-proposals, please respond to KC's email
    on the list
    ... Kenneth suggests we need an API for requesting view mode changes
    from JavaScript? (
    [26]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/00
    02.html ). Any comments?

      [26] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/ 
2010AprJun/0002.html

    <kenneth> I cannot get the phone to work :-(

    <kenneth> ArtB, any way, what about the -d ? changed vs change?

    AB: there is no consensus on your proposal
    ... continue discussion on the mail list

    <darobin> [FWIW I think that dropping the -d is fine, it's more
    consistent with the rest]

    <kenneth> ok

    <darobin> [I also think that naming issues shouldn't be discussed by
    groups, they are editor territory]

    KC: we need that API
    ... so apps can change view modes
    ... but some widgets may not support all modes
    ... thus need a request
    ... also a question about where the API should be defined
    ... e.g. the Widget Interface spec

    MC: we can't put it in TWI spec since that spec is in CR

    RB: could be put in TWI spec 1.1

    MC: don't want versioned specs but supplemental specs

    <timeless_mbp> TWITNG

    MC: if we can put this in CSSOM [Views] that would be good

    <darobin> Anne van Kesteren

    KC: who can talk to about doing that?

    MC: Anne van Kesteren and/or the CSS WG

    <kenneth> sounds frisian :-)

    <kenneth> ah

    MC: Opera's view is to use CSSOM as much as possible

    AB: can you take a cut at what should move to CSSOM and what, if
    anything, would be left for us to specifiy

    MC: I got some pushback from AvK (see list)
    ... may need to take this to the CSS WG
    ... perhaps Robin or Josh can help here

    AB: we do indeed need someone to agree to do spec split analysis

    <darobin> [I will look into it, but just like timeless I need time]

    MC: I can ask AvK

    <scribe> ACTION: marcos talk to AvK about how to split the VM-I spec
    and the CSSOM spec [recorded in
    [27]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-wam-minutes.html#action04]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-522 - Talk to AvK about how to split the
    VM-I spec and the CSSOM spec [on Marcos Caceres - due 2010-04-15].

    MC: perhaps we can co-edit the spec with him

    AB: anyone else beside KC that can help with this spec split
    analysis?

    MC: I will push internally

    AB: ok, sounds good
    ... anything else on VM-I for today?

Widget Update spec

    AB: I believe Marcos has added all of the PAG's recommendations to
    the ED

    MC: yes, that is correct
    ... it was actually Robin that did the edits

    AB: thanks Robin!
    ... I think it would be useful to get a formal WD published that
    just reflects the PAGs recommendations
    ... thus I'd like to see a new WD published as soon as we can

    MC: I agree
    ... it needs to be labeled as a snapshot

    AB: we can address that via the Status of the Doc

    MC: I'll add some more stuff

    AB: propose that we publish the Widget Update spec as soon as Marcos
    can get it ready
    ... any objections?

    [ none ]

    AB: can you get it ready for publication next week?

    MC: yes, I can get it pubrules compliant today

    <scribe> ACTION: marcos notify ArtB when Widget Update spec is ready
    for a new WD publication [recorded in
    [28]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-wam-minutes.html#action05]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-523 - Notify ArtB when Widget Update spec
    is ready for a new WD publication [on Marcos Caceres - due
    2010-04-15].

    MC: perhaps we can coordiante the publications

    AB: there is some value in that but also some additional
    coordination overhead
    ... anything else on Updates spec for today?

AOB

    AB: any other topics for today?
    ... next meeting is April 15. This meeting is adjourned.

    <kenneth> I might not be joining as I'm travelling to US

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: barstow notify the WG after FH adds the CR to the ED
    [recorded in
    [29]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-wam-minutes.html#action02]
    [NEW] ACTION: barstow schedule a Director's call to publish a CR of
    the WARP spec [recorded in
    [30]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-wam-minutes.html#action03]
    [NEW] ACTION: frederick update the Widget DigSig spec to reflect the
    CR [recorded in
    [31]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-wam-minutes.html#action01]
    [NEW] ACTION: marcos notify ArtB when Widget Update spec is ready
    for a new WD publication [recorded in
    [32]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-wam-minutes.html#action05]
    [NEW] ACTION: marcos talk to AvK about how to split the VM-I spec
    and the CSSOM spec [recorded in
    [33]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-wam-minutes.html#action04]

    [End of minutes]
Received on Thursday, 8 April 2010 14:15:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:38 GMT