W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcgm-wg@w3.org > May 2009

[Minutes] WebCGM Telecon 2009-05-20

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 10:27:05 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20090520102441.03c7d080@localhost>
To: WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>

WebCGM WG --

The minutes of the teleconference are at

http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/WG/2009/05/20-webcgm-minutes.html

and also available as text, below.

    [1]W3C

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

                                - DRAFT -

                        WebCGM WG Teleconference
                               20 May 2009

    [2]Agenda

       [2] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2009May/0005.html

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/20-webcgm-irc

Attendees

    Present
           Lofton_Henderson, Don_Larson, Stuart_Galt, dave

    Regrets
           Benoit

    Chair
           lofton

    Scribe
           stuart

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]roll call 11:00am ET,
          2. [6]Text for 2nd LCWD
          3. [7]WG timeline
          4. [8]next F2F: Ann Arbor
      * [9]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________



    <scribe> scribe: stuart

    minutes:
    [10]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2009May/000
    5.html

      [10] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2009May/0005.html

    regrets Benoit

roll call 11:00am ET,

    Lofton_Henderson, Don_Larson, Stuart_Galt, dave, plh

    <lofton> (Philippe (plh) said he'd lurk on IRC in case we have
    questions.)

Text for 2nd LCWD

    The text at
    [11]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/Overv
    iew.html has incrporated approved changes

      [11] 
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/Overview.html

    There were also a couple of errors in the ecmascript and in the ACI
    DTD.

    that were also fixed.

    <lofton> as usual, look here for specifics of changes:

    <lofton>
    [12]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCG
    M21-Appendix.html#webcgm_changelog

      [12] 
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-Appendix.html#webcgm_changelog

    This version of the draft uses styling that indicates changes since
    the previous last call.

    It is worrysome that there were errors found in chapter 9 and the
    DTD at this late time.

    Rob, Dave and Stuart were assigned to look for errors in the DTD

    <lofton> That's about as good as we can do ... we'll have to assume
    we have got right for this round.

    <lofton> Resolution: The WebCGM WG wants the WebCGM 2.1
    specification (reference [$1\47]), with possible further pubrules
    alignment, to go forward for 2nd Last Call Working Draft review.

    All present approve

    <lofton> Plus Benoit approved by email:

    <lofton>
    [13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2009May/000
    6.html

      [13] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2009May/0006.html

    <lofton> When to start review?

    <lofton> I had thought 1st June, Monday, about 10 days from now.

    Does the last call review need to be completed before the Oasis TC
    takes the version to use as a seed for a committee draft?

    <lofton> According to the MoU, it goes back to the TC after we
    complete CR phase, which we now anticipate around Aug-Sept

    <plh> how long will the review be?

    <lofton> Thierry said it should be 4 weeks.

    <plh> LC review I mean

    <plh> that's a minimum indeed

    <plh> but it's not necessarily a maximum

    <lofton> Given the very light external (outside of the WG)
    commenting,

    <plh> which group need to review the document?

    <lofton> we think 4 weeks will suffice.

    <plh> ok

    <lofton> Groups: I'll need to check it again. Fairly low number on
    the 1st LCWD review.

    <plh> and then CR during Aug-Sep?

    <lofton> Aug-sept CR is our current thought. It depends on...

    <lofton> ...progress by implementors, some of whom are in the TC but
    not the WG.

    <lofton> So far...

    <lofton> ...progress looks like Aug-Sept is an achievable goal for
    CR.

    <plh> will we have a test suite for WebCGM 2.1?

    <lofton> (Test Suite: work has been completed in the WebCGM TC, who
    has responsibility for the TS, for a first public release.) Here's
    one other detail, about your "Groups" question...

    <lofton> ...From the Charter:

    <lofton>
    [14]http://www.w3.org/2007/10/webcgm-charter.html#coordination

      [14] http://www.w3.org/2007/10/webcgm-charter.html#coordination

    <lofton> The only group that gave us significant feedback on...

    <lofton> ...1st LCWD was I18N. We satisfied their comments. Thierry
    says that...

    <lofton> ...2nd LCWD Review should be limited to differences from
    1st LCWD. Therefore...

    <lofton> ...we expect very little dependency-related stuff. There
    are few differences...

    <plh> sounds appropriate to me

    <lofton> from 1st to 2nd, and they are pointed out in the Change Log
    and styled with yellow highlighting.

    <plh> did we check with SVG during the 1st period that they were ok
    not reviewing?

    <lofton> We need Thierry to answer that. But ...

    <lofton> ...he did send a reminder near the end of 1st LCWD review,
    to all

    <lofton> "dependencies" and the Chair's list in general, IIRC.

    <lofton> As I said, "outside" interest, or critical feedback, seems
    low outside of the WG.

    <lofton> Question for Philippe:

    <lofton> Is 1st June a reasonable goal, given that Thierry is just
    returning then? He typically does lots of the...

    <plh> well, if he does a lot, no, it is not

    <lofton> ...process stuff for us -- notifications, permissions,
    arrangements with pubs-team, etc...

    <lofton> ...Plus he reverifies my initial work on pubrules
    alignment, with which...

    <plh> I thought you were doing the pubrules

    <lofton> ...as you know, we are now having a link-check mystery.

    <plh> I could help verifying

    <lofton> What do you think would be a reasonable goal, if not 1st
    June?

    <plh> link checker needs to be fixed. I expect it to be reparied
    today, it's a major issue for us.

    <plh> June 4

    <plh> assuming you and I keep looking into the pubrules issue

    <lofton> Okay. We can say June 4th. However...

    <lofton> I will be travelling starting June 4th, back in the office
    on Monday 8th. Is that a problem?

    <plh> I don't believe so

    <plh> if Thierry has questions for you, we'll kae sure he is aware
    of your departure date

    <lofton> Okay, let's say June 4th.

    <lofton> Thierry has been very helpful in the process parts that
    involve...

    <lofton> ...requesting permission to publish, arranging with
    pub-team, announcing to...

    <plh> biggest burden on process in the pubrules item

    <plh> our webmaster can publish any time with a 2 days advance
    notice

    <lofton> ...Chairs list, etc. Who should take the action of those
    process items?

    <plh> can you prepare a draft to be sent to the Chairs list?

    <lofton> (I.e., non-pubrules process -- I'll try to continue working
    on pubrules alignment, in consultation with you.)

    <plh> a short one is enough

    <lofton> I could look up the draft from 1st LCWD. But if I
    understood Thierry...

    <lofton> ...we are also going to point out that this review is on
    differences from...

    <lofton> 1st LCWD.

    <plh> and you can point this out in the status of the document

    <lofton> If these tasks become too much (along with the other stuff
    that I have to do), then...

    <lofton> ...we might consider slipping till the 11th June (for 4
    weeks), to get Thierry's help when he's back. ...TBD...

    <lofton> So summarize: we'll try for 4th, fall back to 11th if need
    be.

WG timeline

    we have been talking about it already :)

    <lofton> Right. Actually the adjusted timeline of reference
    [$1\47]...

    <lofton>
    [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2009Mar/att
    -0004/webcgm-charter_milestones_revised.html

      [15] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2009Mar/att-0004/webcgm-charter_milestones_revised.html

    <lofton> ...shows Aug timeframe for CR, which is what we just said.
    (Tho' May timeframe for 2nd LCWD Review.)

    <lofton> So that [$1\47] proposed adjustment is realistic for the CR
    milestone.

next F2F: Ann Arbor

    It looks like the timing is still good for the second half of
    August. We will continue to verify this with those producing
    implementations.

    The next telecon will be 3 June 2009

Summary of Action Items

    [End of minutes]
      _________________________________________________________


     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [16]scribe.perl version 1.135
     ([17]CVS log)
     $Date: 2009/05/20 16:23:53 $
      _________________________________________________________

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

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[...snip...]
Received on Wednesday, 20 May 2009 16:45:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 20 May 2009 16:45:00 GMT