See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 12 May 2010
<fjh> ScribeNick: jmorris
fjh: agenda review
<fjh> 5 May 2010
<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010May/att-0014/minutes-2010-05-05.html
RESOLUTION: 5 May 2010 Minutes approved
<fjh> http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/policy/
fjh: we have general agreement on trust domains being done explicitly
... asking paddy on agreement with this
paddy: yes
... target in nokia model is the trust domain
... we separate out trust domain from rest of document
... some cases we have to work through
fjh: lots of benefit about being explicit about trust domains
... being explicit will enable simplification
... like to suggest formal resolution
... proposing resolution: We will use explicit trust domains in the policy framework
paddy: notes that XACML policy expressions can be refactored
... for useful cases, one can mechanically convert one expression from another
LauraA: we would name a policy set for a trust domain and within domain
... we can have individual policies?
paddy: to be able to express the same things ...
... in BONDI you can have multiple targets
... you must be able to define the same thing in different trust domains
... all of the things you can do with a BONDI policy, you must also be able to do for a trust domain
... principle of separating def. of target and def. of rules is possible
... when you write trust domains, you have to have the same functionality as with BONDI
fjh: this may be an 80/20 situation, where you do not meet this
... good to identify the 20 percent
paddy: Agree we should look at use cases
bryan: clarification on wording
... don't you mean the ability to define explicit trust domains
fjh: there must be a trust domain
bryan: might the absence of an explicit domain imply an implicit trust default domain
fjh: we might be able to accommodate this
... we might be able to pre-define some trust domains
... if you don't know what trust domain, then "untrusted"
bryan: we are not defining trust domains themselves
... we are defining ability to define t.d.s
... not talking about "home" "work"
... we are not just trying to define a set
paddy: goal is to separate target from rules
<fjh> proposed RESOLUTION: make trust domain model an explicit and separate part of policy framework
paddy: we also may identify some well known trust domains
RESOLUTION: WG will make trust domain model an explicit and separate part of policy framework
fjh: referring to earlier comment by LauraA
... suggest we take schema material in separate document
<bryan_sullivan> +1
LauraA: some of sections suggested to go under framework already have features of profiling
<fjh> suggest separation, see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010May/0052.html
LauraA: not 100% clean separation between those two schemes
... 3.3 to 3.5 for example are already part of naming of GML? language
fjh: there is some overlap but want to take a pass on separating model
paddy: the source of the bondi document had the model in two separate parts
... there is a dictionary that is shared
fjh: can you do more editorial work?
LauraA: okay but good if someone can help
possible ACTION: LauraA to work on framework document to inject more separation
LauraA: your e-mail to simplify flows
... is fjh's suggestion to take nokia's flows and simplify
fjh: where can we simply if possible
... we have a model with lots of features, but can we simplify
... we will get more adoption if simpler
... if you nokia one
send message to list for seek on help on particular sections
<bryan_sullivan> if Laura needs help on a specific section or subject I can take the request by email and will provide some text
scribe: may have existing action
<fjh> ACTION-152?
<trackbot> ACTION-152 -- Laura Arribas to edit policy framework, reviewing BONDI material and editorial update -- due 2010-05-05 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/152
LauraA: I can keep working on ACTION-152
fjh: we can work on the list on this
<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010May/0038.html
fjh: claus also had a message
... he is saying that there is work to be done
paddy: my take on that is that we need to be sure to have the right set of attributes to define the widget or whatever
<fjh> ACTION-45?
<trackbot> ACTION-45 -- David Rogers to provide use case with threat model scenarios -- due 2010-03-16 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/45
<fjh> ACTION-104?
<trackbot> ACTION-104 -- David Rogers to add use case related to ISSUE-37 -- due 2010-03-17 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/104
<fjh> ACTION-145?
<trackbot> ACTION-145 -- Bryan Sullivan to provide an architectural flow for Policy Reqs -- due 2010-03-25 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/145
fjh: looking at actions
<fjh> ACTION-166?
<trackbot> ACTION-166 -- Frederick Hirsch to review policy requirements and propose changes -- due 2010-05-05 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/166
fjh: I will look at them this week
<fjh> ACTION-167?
<trackbot> ACTION-167 -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux to make a concrete proposal for policy framework based on his comments http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Apr/0030.html -- due 2010-05-19 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/167
fjh: I noticed paper re P3P trying to come up with labels
alissa: it is cited in ruleset document
<tlr> pointer?
fjh: nothing more on privacy right now?
alissa: still waiting for ruleset attributes are mutually exclusive
... robin has this question
<alissa> http://cups.cs.cmu.edu/soups/2009/proceedings/a4-kelley.pdf
alissa: conversation on list re mutual exclusivity
... waiting for response
<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010May/0015.html
fjh: next week we will decide on call whether to go to last call
... bunch of issues
... mohammed had comments, max dealt with them
... jonas had comment
<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010May/0029.html
fjh: naming issue got resolved
... we need to be sure we are ready for last call
<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010May/0026.html
fjh: maxf resolved timeless issues
<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010May/0017.html
fjh: one issue to discuss: jonas how data is to be used
... we need to respond ... this is open
<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010May/0039.html
fjh: second open issue is what is motivation to having some much data
... this is a minimization things, we are trying to deal with this
... we might want to fix the privacy stuff up some
<fjh> ACTION-58?
<trackbot> ACTION-58 -- Bryan Sullivan to make a concrete proposal with a vocabulary-based approach to system & events, with a few examples (e.g. battery level) -- due 2009-11-11 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/58
<fjh> ACTION-116?
<trackbot> ACTION-116 -- Bryan Sullivan to provide input on DCO mapping for SysInfo -- due 2010-03-24 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/116
fjh: we need to really get it ready
<fjh> action-58: bryan notes sysinfo api facilitates this now
<trackbot> ACTION-58 Make a concrete proposal with a vocabulary-based approach to system & events, with a few examples (e.g. battery level) notes added
bryan: this has been addressed
<fjh> action-58 closed
<trackbot> ACTION-58 Make a concrete proposal with a vocabulary-based approach to system & events, with a few examples (e.g. battery level) closed
fjh: looking at ACTION-116
bryan: this is done
<fjh> action-116 closed
<trackbot> ACTION-116 Provide input on DCO mapping for SysInfo closed
bryan: mapping on explicit options in API
<fjh> action-162?
<trackbot> ACTION-162 -- Robin Berjon to make SysInfo ready for pub -- due 2010-04-21 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/162
alissa: I proposed temporary language for all APIs re privacy framework
<fjh> action-169?
<trackbot> ACTION-169 -- Frederick Hirsch to insert temporary privacy language into the APIs. -- due 2010-05-05 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/169
alissa: this might help jonas
fjh: uncomfortable to blast away existing text
... so it would good for individual editors to add this text
... richard, maybe can you work on this
... alissa sent language to the list
<alissa> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Apr/0086.html
fjh: real issue is making sure that maxf's conclusion on these threads is complete
... we are close on last call
... that is all on Sysinfo
<fjh> ACTION: fjh to confirm status of sysinfo comment handling with max, and add privacy text [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/12-dap-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-172 - Confirm status of sysinfo comment handling with max, and add privacy text [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2010-05-19].
fjh: other topics?? messaging?
<fjh> on the list
richt: I am still catching up and will go to list
fjh: anything we should discuss now?
richt: parameter passing discussion?
fjh: do not want to decide without robin
... might be better on list
... wrapping up
... all editors - please look at privacy text