Minutes 2009-09-16 telcon

Hi all,

here are the minutes for our call.


- DRAFT -Device APIs and Policy Working Group Teleconference16 Sep 2009

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees
Present Robin_Berjon, Frederick_Hirsch, Thomas_Roessler,  
Dominique_Hazaël-Massieux, Anssi_Kostiainen, Max_Froumentin,        
AnssiK, marengo, Kangchan, marcin2, wonsuk, JereK, ilkka, LA, Paddy,  
Byers, Claes, JonathanJ Regrets Daniel_Baiges, DanielColoma,  
DavidRogers Chair Robin Berjon, Frederick Hirsch Scribe  
Max_Froumentin, maxf
Contents
	• Topics
		• introduction to W3C
		• General Logistics
		• Announcements
		• Charter Walk-Through
		• Editors
		• Policy Segment
		• APIs Segment
		• AOB
	• Summary of Action Items

  <trackbot> Date: 16 September 2009
trackbot, help

<trackbot> See http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help

<fhirsch> some scribe instructions are here

<fhirsch> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Group/Scribe-Instructions.html

<fhirsch> but we've done the initial set up already

<fhirsch> when you join, please use irc to register yourself with  
Present+ your_name

<fhirsch> when you join please register yourself with Present+ name,  
and update your handle with zakim, aabb is irc-name

<marengo> + +039011228aabb

<fhirsch> when you join, please update the minutes attendance with  
Present+ your-name and update the phone bridge by mappting your number  
with zakim, e.g. zakim, aabb is maxf etc

<fhirsch> if you use a real name with the Present+ command then your  
real name will appear in the minutes attendance...

<dom> Group's list of participants

<fhirsch> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2009Sep/0031.html

<fhirsch> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2009Sep/0031.html

fhirsch: ok with agenda?

[agreement]

<wonsuk> +1 for current agenda

<dom> a few (re-used) slides

fhirsch: agenda item 2, introduction to W3C

dom: [goes through slides above]

introduction to W3C
<darobin> the full story on Recommendation Track: http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#Reports

fhirsch: about the submissions, is there anything special to say. e.g.  
Bondi?

tlr: behind the scenes W3C and OMTP staff have been chasing companies  
involved with Bondi
... it is my understanding that all companies involved in Bondi have  
joined the WG or in one case have made a royalty-free commitment to  
the WG
... also, a few companies have indicated interest in future Bondi  
work. These companies will either join this group or make a similar  
comitment
... so I think we're good to go and don't have an IPR concern.

fhirsch: from a chairing perspective, we don't like to talk about IPR,  
so we'll avoid it as much as possible

darobin: as participant you're more than welcome to raise any issue  
youre aware of

General Logistics
<dom> Device APIs and Policy Working Group home page

fhirsch: we have a weekly call now scheduled, an IRC channel. There  
are instructions on our site.
... people should be familiar with IRC queues, tracking, agenda, etc.

<dom> DAP WG Tracker

darobin: the tracker is not just for chairs. People can give  
themselves action items.

fhirsch: chairs welcome help with maintaining and editing actions
... good form to keep status up to date, link emails to actions, etc.

<dom> ACTION-1?

<trackbot> ACTION-1 -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux to create scheduling  
questionnaire and distribute to WG -- due 2009-09-09 -- CLOSED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/1

fhirsch: tracker can be used either in IRC, or on the web directly

<darobin> ISSUE-4?

<trackbot> ISSUE-4 -- API Versioning -- RAISED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/4

<dom> Tracker IRC documentation

darobin: there are a lot of tools, it's ok to ask questions about  
them, because we know it can be overwhelming at first

fhirsch: we need to keep a record of the decisions made, and those  
tools help avoiding needless controversies.

<dom> Registration for DAP WG F2F at TPAC 2009 (Nov 2-3)

fhirsch: no apparent issue with weekly telecon time. So left as is

<dom> Current registrants for F2F

fhirsch: TPAC: this group is meeting at the W3C TPAC. Please join us  
and register early.

<dom> [50$ fee supposed to be raised to 75$ on Sep 21st]

fhirsch: it's useful for the chairs to know who's going to be there,  
or who's going to be on the phone
... we might want to have a questionnaire to know that.
... but we can take that offline.

<dom> [if anyone is interested in attending the F2F by phone, let me  
know and I'll see if that's an option]

Announcements
fhirsch: I don't have any

darobin: nope

arve: about the face to face meeting, I'll be participating on the phone

<tlr> ACTION: thomas to set up dial-in questionnaire for face-to-face  
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/16-dap-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-7 - Set up dial-in questionnaire for face-to- 
face [on Thomas Roessler - due 2009-09-23].

Charter Walk-Through
http://www.w3.org/2009/05/DeviceAPICharter

fhirsch goes through charter

<dom> Workshop report

arve: about the face-to-face meetings. Will we try to coordinate with  
other WGs like webapps?

fhirsch: personally, it's up to the WG to manage its timing, etc. It's  
generally a good thing to indeed try and coordinate.

darobin: difficult to focus on a single WG to coordinate with, but  
worth investigating

arve: I'm happy with the answer

<arve> pronouciation guide for my name: ar-vë

marcin: about TPAC logistics. A person cannot currently attend DAP or  
Webapps. Art Barstow is making sure it's going to be addressed

<dom> [I think we might want to consider a joint meeting with WebApps  
WG]

fhirsch: other conflicts exist, too

tlr: [looking at schedule]
... we're unlikely to be able to make major rearrangements,  
unfortunately
... I'm not sure what we can do about it.

fhirsch: the chairs will do their best, but can only do so much.

<tlr> ACTION: frederick to work with Robin and Team on TPAC schedule  
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/16-dap-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-8 - Work with Robin and Team on TPAC  
schedule [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2009-09-23].

darobin explains the importance of addressing issues like  
accessibility, i18n, mobility and security

darobin: the 2-implementation criterion is minimal. It would be better  
to have 2 implementations implementing *all* features

darobin: the general idea about deliverables is to have 1 document for  
each API.
... requires quite a few editors, and also prioritisation, but we can  
check that later

Kangchan: [unintelligible]

fhirsch: we could create task forces with other groups, we could add  
deliverables. But our first task is to make a roadmap

<Kangchan> My question is that in the WG charter, Devices in this WG  
is identified such as desktop computers, laptop computers, mobile  
internet devices (MIDs), cellular phones, etc. Is Television also one  
of the target devices?

<darobin> Kangchan, right, the list is not exhaustive — all target  
devices are relevant

<tlr> kangchan, as darobin just said on IRC, we're Any Device,  
Anywhere, Any Time, so this is a list of examples. Yes, TV is in scope.

fhirsch: informal dependencies are good, so I'd like to find out who  
is involved in other groups.
... about tracking and actions I'd rather not get blocked on something  
someone is supposed to do and can't
... rules for Good Standing aren't that strict

darobin: Good Standing isn't enforced stricltly, but it is more  
important within the editors pool

fhirsch: remember that technical discussions should happen on the  
public list.
... minutes are also published in public

Editors
darobin: basically, specification editors transform WG decisions into  
text
... there's no need to go through editor work right now.
... there are plenty of resources on the W3C site
... we chose to have an set of editors for each API and for policy
... we welcome more people. If you're not sure, please talk to the  
chairs offline. We can assist with techniques and give you an idea  
about time commitment

[unintelligible]

darobin: not just 1 editor for all the documents, but a pool of editors.

fhirsch: different specs could move at different speeds, too

darobin: putting all APIs in 1 document would be a problem if a  
problem arose
... because if at Last Call a technical issue arises, the whole  
document needs to go to Last Call again.

[??? volunteers]

fhirsch: We could use some help on the policy side, too

arve: I note that figuring out who is in the pool could be done later  
as well

fhirsch: definitely
... although it's helpful to know early, for practical reasons

Policy Segment
fhirsch: as chairs it's important to know who's going to make  
submissions, or update them.

<fhirsch> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/

fhirsch: we have contributions listed on the home page already
... I don't believe there's a lot in the Nokia submissions on policy.  
There has been an update in Bondi though.
... It talks about packaging, widget signing, etc. Uses webapps spec  
and adds requirements. Then it talks about features.
... there are 2 security areas addressed, I can't go into details, but  
features let you say what things you need to do,
... access and permissions associated with capabilities, etc.

APIs Segment
darobin: some work has started on the mailing list.

<darobin> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/open

darobin: I'd like to look quickly at open issues.
... The first 4 are about API style
... Strawpoll on ISSUE-4 was unanimous so I'd like to close it, while  
leaving the others open
... And some decisions on style will be obvious as we start

<tlr> issue-4?

<trackbot> ISSUE-4 -- API Versioning -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/4

darobin: any objections about closing issue 4?

[none]

<tlr> RESOLUTION: issue-4 closed

darobin: now closed.

marcin: I will submit input documents to BONDI and W3C soon (in about  
a week)

darobin: issues 5 to 16 are requirements
... we are trying avoid to go through a heavyweight requirement  
gathering process
... but we'll switch to heavier if lightweight fails
... I started drafting requirements for 2 examples

<darobin> http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/camera/Overview.html

<darobin> http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/file-system/Overview.html

darobin:It would be helpful if people would send requirement for each  
APIs
... by no means the documents are final
... who would like to volunteer to submit requirements?
... application configuration: nothing yet
... application launcher. [no response].

arve: how about merging those 2 issues for now and gather requirements  
in 1 go?

darobin: fine with that

<darobin> ACTION: arve to draft requirements for App Conf & App  
Launcher, possibly by getting maxf or Marcos to do it [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/16-dap-minutes.html#action03 
]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-9 - Draft requirements for App Conf & App  
Launcher, possibly by getting maxf or Marcos to do it [on Arve  
Bersvendsen - due 2009-09-23].

darobin: calendar API?

JK: perhaps requirements should be given to more than one person

darobin: of course, the final reqs wouldn't be from just one person

richt: I was wondering about the level of requirements needed. Should  
they be proper documents, or mailing list posts?

darobin: just mailing list ok. Similar level to the example ones (i.e.  
high-level functional)

arve: look at File I/O, for instance

darobin: any takers for calendar? [none]
... communication log? [none]
... contacts? Robin volunteers

<darobin> ACTION: robin to do requirements for contacts [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/16-dap-minutes.html#action04 
]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-10 - Do requirements for contacts [on Robin  
Berjon - due 2009-09-23].

darobin: gallery? [none]
... any other?

Dzung Tran: I would like to tak issue-14

scribe: is there a description of what those APIs are?

darobin: yes, in the charter.

Tran: how would I bring up other items about new APIs?

darobin first submit it to the list, then we'll figure out if we need  
a new charter

<hendry> has each editor of existing BONDI apis emailed to ask to  
become W3C editors?

<JonathanJ> DAP open issues: http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/open

darobin: any opinions on prioritization among specifications?
... are there any we should focus on first?

<richt> could I suggest messaging, contacts and filesystem?

[no answer on the phone]

<tlr> richt, I recommend getting on the queue

JereK: I suggest Calendar, Contact, Messaging: Tasks

<dom> +1 on Calendar and Contacts

scribe: other possibility is to use smaller subgroups of APIs: grouped  
by multimedia, system, etc.

darobin: hearing people arguing for Calendar, Contacts, Messaging at  
least

richt: messaging, contact and filesystem
... we have a lot of contribution on filesystem already

arve: filesystem needs to be given priority. There is incompatible  
work going on, and implementations

<darobin> RB: hearing mostly FS, Calendar, Contact, and Messaging

<wonsuk> +1 for JereK's proposal

arve: anyone wants to start drafting suggestion for those APIs? Even  
if it means taking from submitted ones?
... volunteer for FileSystem

<darobin> ACTION: arve to get the ball rolling for the FS API  
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/16-dap-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-11 - Get the ball rolling for the FS API [on  
Arve Bersvendsen - due 2009-09-23].

<marcin2> Tasks + Calendar + Contacts = PIM, could we handle them as  
one?

marcin: would try to prioritise together PIM apis (tasks, contacts,  
calendar)

darobin: various existing APIs don't necessarily have the same ties

arve: we used to consider them as 1 in Opera Platform (2004-2005)
... dependencies makes implementation hard. I would treat them as  
separate

darobin: we could merge them later, if we find they're very linked.

marcin: ok, just want to make sure we're using patterns consistently  
across those APIs

darobin: and across all of them

AOB
richt: I wanted to check about how to go forward, regarding
... evolutions planned in the charter if something new comes along  
(like new APIs)

darobin: we should then discuss about rechartering, if only for IPR  
reasons

richt: BONDI are producing new APIs, not sure how that would fit in.

darobin: can discuss later.

arve: we have to be aware of those issues sooner than later.
... if we have a concrete list of issues requiring rechartering, it's  
better to handle it now rather than in 2 years

darobin, not sure that's necessary actually

<arve> I'm about to drop off, my battery's dead

wonsuk: we need to make a wiki page for WG

<arve> +1

darobin: we have a non-wiki page. If anybody wants to contribute, we  
can give them CVS access

<dom> (regrets from me next week)

<darobin> bleaaargh

darobin: adjourned. kthxbai

Summary of Action Items[NEW]ACTION: arve to draft requirements for App  
Conf & App Launcher, possibly by getting maxf or Marcos to do it  
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/16-dap-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: arve to get the ball rolling for the FS API [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/16-dap-minutes.html#action05 
]
[NEW] ACTION: frederick to work with Robin and Team on TPAC schedule  
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/16-dap-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: robin to do requirements for contacts [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/16-dap-minutes.html#action04 
]
[NEW] ACTION: thomas to set up dial-in questionnaire for face-to-face  
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/16-dap-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Tran to take on ISSUE-14 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/16-dap-minutes.html#action06 
]

[End of minutes]

--
Robin Berjon
   robineko — setting new standards
   http://robineko.com/