- From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 16:21:07 +0200
- To: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group WG <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Hi, The minutes of today's call are available at: http://www.w3.org/2009/05/19-bpwg-minutes.html ... and copied as text below. Short call. Main points: - We discussed JSON parsing, acknowledged the performance impact but are concerned about security. - We discussed a BP around the use of OpenID but don't think OpenID can be specifically called out. See the minutes for more details. Francois. ----- Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference 19 May 2009 [2]Agenda [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009May/0027.html See also: [3]IRC log [3] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/19-bpwg-irc Attendees Present Francois, brucel, DKA, abel, Kai_Dietrich, SeanP, jsmanrique Regrets EdC, adam, jo, alanc, Bryan, jeffs, yeliz, sangwhan, rob, tom Chair DKA Scribe francois Contents * [4]Topics 1. [5]MWABP: JSON parsing 2. [6]MWABP - Kai's Hendry comment 3. [7]Addendum to BP 4. [8]CT 5. [9]Issues and Actions * [10]Summary of Action Items _________________________________________________________ MWABP: JSON parsing brucel: I talked to some of the guys in Opera. We don't have any formal tests that we've done and that we could share, but the "10 times" figure sounds correct to anyone. ... whether we should reconsider is another topic, but the impact of performance is real. dka: ok, that's an important point. <brucel> Opera also agreed that security concerns are v important francois: dom replied with the same arguments I raised before. ... The problem is with security. It's hard to write a BP that has security implications. <brucel> Anne van Kesteran just replied to me that "soon browsers will have native JSON parsers" but that's not a BP for now dka: ok so we need to find some balance between security and performance MWABP - Kai's Hendry comment -> [11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-comments/2009Apr Jun/0002.html Kai Hendry's comment [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-comments/2009AprJun/0002.html francois: it's more or less a suggestion that we have a BP around the use of OpenID dka: I think it's worth considering. Maybe not talking specifically about OpenID. ... Do you think it fits into the mobile space? francois: it may not be mobile enough and also with OpenID you need to enter a URI to log into a site so this might not be appropriate for the mobile space. francois: Also FOAF+SSL technology might remove the need to enter u+p but this is still an emerging technology. francois: I love OpenID but ... <DKA> So do I! dka: my view would be that it's incorrect to have a BP that specifically calls out OpenID. <brucel> +1 with dka for usability issues dka: I think it's worth discussing on the mailing-list. ... Using one OpenID could ease remembering of the URI by browsers, but that's not implemented in browsers for the time being AFAICT. Addendum to BP <jsmanrique> Zakim abel_.a is jsmanrique kai: the status really hasn't changed. Jo should reword to have some linguistic integrity within the document and set another editorial meeting. dka: I know Jo's really busy these days, so I'm a bit worried about that. Is it possible that we re-assign this action to someone else? kai: Phil Archer had offered to do that. dka: He's the one I had in mind, indeed. <scribe> ACTION: dan to get in touch with Phil and Jo with a view to having the Addendum reviewed for consistency [recorded in [12]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/19-bpwg-minutes.html#action01] <trackbot> Created ACTION-963 - Get in touch with Phil and Jo with a view to having the Addendum reviewed for consistency [on Daniel Appelquist - due 2009-05-26]. kai: I would be happy to do that as well. dka: let me start this, and I'll get out of the way. kai: good. ... what about the second editorial session? francois: another one was planned indeed, but it's kind of linked to the above action on dan to see if Phil can replace Jo. CT dka: anything we could discuss? francois: I don't think so. We need to see the result of the discussion put into words. Editorial work. seanp: I agree with francois. dka: I guess that's another point to try to remove the addendum from Jo's hand so that he may focus on the CT guidelines. <brucel> More on the JSOn question: It would only make the app run 10x slower if evaling the incoming data is the major performance bottleneck. If that's the case you might be better off dumping json altogether and going for a format that is optimized for your needs rather than designed to be flexible (see e.g. [$1\47] for an example complete with numbers). <brucel> [$1\47] [13]http://code.flickr.com/blog/2009/03/18/building-fast-client-side -searches/ [13] http://code.flickr.com/blog/2009/03/18/building-fast-client-side-searches/ dka: any other point? francois: not from me. About relationship between WCAG and MWBP, the Education and Outreach WG is to review the doc on Friday. Hopefully publication early next week. Issues and Actions <DKA> ACTION-692? <trackbot> ACTION-692 -- Sunghan Kim to provide some example BP statements based on the presentation he gave at Korea F2F -- due 2008-03-11 -- CLOSED <trackbot> [14]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/692 [14] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/692 <DKA> ACTION-962? <trackbot> ACTION-962 -- François Daoust to reach out for comments on MWABP via the BPBlog -- due 2009-05-19 -- OPEN <trackbot> [15]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/962 [15] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/962 francois: I published a blog post, no comment received so far. close ACTION-962 <trackbot> ACTION-962 Reach out for comments on MWABP via the BPBlog closed ACTION-959? <trackbot> ACTION-959 -- François Daoust to enact the resolution on XHTML Basic 1.1 revision - when it reaches rec -- due 2009-05-19 -- OPEN <trackbot> [16]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/959 [16] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/959 francois: this action is pending the publication of XHTML Basic 1.1 as a new Rec. dka: OK, I think we should probably close this call at this point. AOB? <brucel> hugs <jsmanrique> bye dka: Thanks everyone, we'll pick up the topics next week when we have more time and resources. <SeanP> bye Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: dan to get in touch with Phil and Jo with a view to having the Addendum reviewed for consistency [recorded in [17]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/19-bpwg-minutes.html#action01] [End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 19 May 2009 14:21:42 UTC