- From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 20:09:31 +0200
- To: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Hi,
The minutes of today's call are available at:
http://www.w3.org/2011/08/31-webrtc-minutes.html
... and copied as raw text below.
Francois.
-----
Web Real-Time Communications Working Group Teleconference
31 Aug 2011
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2011Aug/0128.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2011/08/31-webrtc-irc
Attendees
Present
Dan_Burnett, Francois_Daoust, Stefan_Hakansson,
Neil_Stratford, Harald_Alvestrand, Narm_Gadiraju,
Adam_Berkgvist, Dan_Druta, Cary_Bran, [Mozilla],
Justin_Uberti
Regrets
Chair
Stefan
Scribe
Francois
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Actions from Quebec meeting
2. [6]Requirements document
3. [7]AOB
* [8]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
Stefan: anything to add to the agenda?
[none heard]
Actions from Quebec meeting
Stefan: Dan to review requirements and send comments to list
DanBurnett: Haven't done that, should be able to do so by next week.
Stefan: next one on Cullen. He sent some initial text. I think we
should keep it open while we get more discussion.
... next one on editor's draft
DanBurnett: I'm sure people have noticed we have a draft now, we
started from an extract from the WhatWG spec. There has been some
discussion on the mailing-list since then.
... Some consensus decisions for changes.
DanBurnett: intent from editors is to propose changes to the spec
based on these discussions to align the spec with the discussions
we've had.
... Anant has some proposal to remove text based on implementation
details.
... Once the document is where we believe the discussion is, we
expect the discussion to continue on the mailing-list.
... When there is rough consensus about something, the editors will
move it to the spec.
... We're trying to be roughly informal, on purpose.
... We suggest that people continue to use the mailing-list right
now.
... At some point later in the process, when we get into more
details, it may make sense to track things more precisely through
some Tracker tool or Bugzilla instance.
Harald: seems reasonable to me.
... So idea is to check threads on the mailing-list and bring
changes when you don't hear anyone against it.
DanBurnett: Right.
Stefan: schedule for updates?
DanBurnett: no schedule set yet. Many changes are likely to make it
to the spec here.
... The intent is that there will be faster releases at least
initially. If that's not the case, we'll need to ensure that things
happen on timely basis.
... You will not see anything this week. Cullen has sent an email
and will send a bunch more next week, supposedly representing the
current consensus.
<burn> First email from Cullen:
[9]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2011Aug/0132.ht
ml
[9] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2011Aug/0132.html
DanBurnett: I'm asking people to reply to these emails if they have
concerns.
Harald: OK, let's go ahead with that plan.
Francois: would keep FPWD deadline in mind, was to be end of
September.
DanBurnett: right, updated spec that represents the current
consensus of the group could be a good FPWD.
... I'm optimistic we can put it forward for end of September.
Requirements document
Stefan: Published requirements document, a couple of comments,
waiting for comments from Dan.
... Not ideal to have different documents for use cases and
requirements, as they may come out of sync.
-> [10]http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/webrtc_reqs.html WebRTC
requirements
[10] http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/webrtc_reqs.html
Stefan: don't know how to deal with this, perhaps stick to one
document that has use cases and requirements, which could be the
IETF one.
... Would anyone object to reverting to only one document?
Justin: As soon as we have common use cases, having just one
document sounds like the right thing to me.
<burn> I believe Justin said one document for use cases, but he
didn't mention requirements
<juberti> I am OK with a single set of requirements too
Stefan: for ease of editing, proposal is to keep everything
together.
DanBurnett: so suggestion is to stick to one use cases and
requirements doc right now for ease of editing, and resolve later if
we split them to have a W3C doc.
Stefan: right.
DanBurnett: Are you planning to publish an update?
Stefan: I should be able to publish an update to the IETF doc
tomorrow.
DanBurnett: Just make sure to forward an announcement to
public-webrtc when you publish a new draft as that does not happen
automatically
Stefan: yes, good point.
AOB
Stefan: reasonable to have a phone call between now and next F2F in
TPAC?
DanBurnett: I think it makes sense to have one call by TPAC.
[discussion on room at TPAC, reserved on Monday/Tuesday]
Stefan: how long is F2F meeting?
Francois: room is reserved for 2 days, there's an AC meeting
starting on Tuesday afternoon, we may adjourn earlier. Up to us!
Stefan: ok, we'll want to go into details about how we're going to
use that time.
... Should review spec into details.
Harald: Now you should go back to the mailing-list and reply to
Cullen.
... or raise other topics.
[Call adjourned]
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2011 18:09:55 UTC