See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 17 November 2010
<scribe> scribeNick: maoteo
<fjh> If you attended this year's TPAC meeting, the W3C created a related survey for your feedback: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/tpac2010-feedback/
<fjh> 2011 1H publishing moratorium 13-18 May, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-device-apis/2010Nov/0006.html
fjh: there is a survey for getting feedback about TPAC
<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Nov/att-0047/minutes-2010-11-04.html
<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Nov/att-0047/minutes-2010-11-05.html
RESOLUTION: The F2F minutes were approved
<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Nov/0048.html
ilkka: sent a summary to the mailing list about the changes done
<fjh> http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/camera/Overview-API.html
ilkka: the biggest change is about supported video/audio formats
<fjh> In a nutshell Capture API is not anymore using MediaFileData interface
<fjh> from HTML Media Capture spec as MediaFileData can't describe well
<fjh> available image, audio and video modes. To replace MediaFileData I added
<fjh> new ConfigurationData interface that currently contains height, width,
<fjh> and MIME type attributes.
<fjh> Additionally user of the API is now able to select one of the available
<fjh> image/audio/video modes while starting the capture process. Updated
<fjh> example illustrates this.
ilkka: users can select the supported mode for image/audio/video
... with the latest version of the spec.
... Another change is that former API used MediaFileData
... that was not very well suited for capture API, so I have added a separate interface for that.
<Zakim> AnssiK, you wanted to ask about default mode
fjh: is it stable now, should we launch a CFC?
AnssiK: should we specify the default mode in case no mode is specified by developer? or should it be decided by the implementors?
ilkka: currently no default mode concept, if the parameter is not present, the behaviour is not specified.
... it may make sense to specify it.
AnssiK: How can I know the characteristics of a mode without launching the capture method?
fjh: do we need any changes in the API to address AnssiK coments?
AnssiK: no changes required, happy as it is
fjh: suggestion, one extra week to review it and decide to go for CFC during next call
ilkka: No rush to publish a new media capture API as it was published recently
<fjh> ACTION-294?
<trackbot> ACTION-294 -- Richard Tibbett to create an editors draft for new proposed network connection API -- due 2010-11-11 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/294
fjh: There was an action to create a new draft based on a new model (294)
richt: I will create a new proposal for this API, there is a lot of work to be done
... an API only for network connection might be simpler
<fjh> general agreement that no consensus at this point
fjh: Need to wait for richt proposal
<dom> http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/contacts/Writer.html
<dom> (also linked from DAP home page)
fjh: is there an editor's draft for contacts writing?
richt: I sent an e-mail with the info
... available at http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/contacts/Writer.html
<dom> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Nov/0002.html
<richt> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Nov/0027.html
richt: the e-mail is available at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Nov/0027.html
... this is for creating a Contact Blob Writer
... Now we have two competing ways to write contacts.
<richt> Contact Blob Writer spec is here: http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/contacts/BlobWriter.html
fjh: can somebody take an action to review it?
<dom> ACTION: Dom to review Contact Blob writer proposal http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/contacts/BlobWriter.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-dap-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-306 - Review Contact Blob writer proposal http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/contacts/BlobWriter.html [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2010-11-24].
dom: I can review the new API
richt: It would be good to stabilize the API and go soon for a Last Call
... and start working on test cases
<fjh> plan to publish updated WD of contacts api, http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/contacts/Overview.html
dom: what is preventing us from going to last call at this stage?
<dom> there are 5 open issues with Contacts API http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/products/5
richt: The reader side at least is quite solid
dom: the only problem could be still having open issues on the API
<fjh> need to review issues related to contacts before last call
richt: I will review the open issues and send an e-mail
<fjh> ACTION: richt to send email to list with resolutions for open issues against contacts, clarifying status [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-dap-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-307 - Send email to list with resolutions for open issues against contacts, clarifying status [on Richard Tibbett - due 2010-11-24].
fjh: Can we do a CFC via e-mail or do we need to wait for next call?
... for the Last Call of the Contacts API.
... none of the chairs will be around next week, so it may be better to wait for the following call
dom: I suggest to wait for the review of the open issues before deciding what to do
<richt> dom, agreed
<fjh> next steps: rich to send closure of contacts issues, WG and chairs to review and agree, then CfC for Last Call for Contacts API
<fjh> parameterization deferred, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Nov/0052.html
<dom> ACTION-302?
<trackbot> ACTION-302 -- Maria Angeles Oteo to morph Messaging API into an API that wraps URI schemes options and adds attachment/success callback, and split off subscription -- due 2010-11-12 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/302
maoteo: I have distributed the proposal with the other editors
<fjh> maria- plan to publish update later this week
maoteo: could upload it to the CVS by end of this week
fjh: Gallery, any update?
dom: have action related to use cases and requirements
fjh: no concrete actions or updates at this point
<fjh> Information on WebApps/HTML5 javascript framework
fjh: Do we have something we should share with regards to the test framework?
<dom> http://test.w3.org/resources/testharness.js
<dom> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-testsuite/2010Nov/
<dom> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-testsuite/2010Nov/0055.html
dom: There has been already some discussions on the html testsuite mailing list
fjh: you can can check them on http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/users/my
... where are we with regards to the Calendar discussions?
richt: we have an action to rewrite the calendar API, based in x-calendar
... it is quite a long specification
... I cannot dedicate all the time it needs
<richt> If someone else would like to work on the Calendar API, please step forward!
fjh: No call next week
<richt> I will certainly continue to assist with optimisations that we have in e.g. Contacts API (i.e. data minimization, etc).
fjh: next call will take place 1st December