See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 31 October 2013
<scribe> ScribeNick: fjh
RfC: Updates of the Technical Reports process; deadline November 27, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Oct/0158.html
fjh: more information on git is available, see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Oct/0174.html
Approve minutes from 17 October 2013
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Oct/att-0141/minutes-2013-10-17.html
RESOLUTION: Minutes from 17 October 2013 are approved
ISSUE-156?
<trackbot> ISSUE-156 -- add the [Clamp] attribute to the argument of the vibrate method -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/156
fjh: I think this is a good idea to add to our specification, suggest Anssi add this
<scribe> ACTION: anssik to review ISSUE-156 and add Clamp to vibration specification [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/10/31-dap-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-670 - Review issue-156 and add clamp to vibration specification [on Anssi Kostiainen - due 2013-11-07].
Updated draft, https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/dap/raw-file/default/discovery-api/Overview.html
fjh: Rich summarized Mitigating router compromise, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Oct/0152.html
... proposed text for ISSUE-130, as part of ACTION-654: Propose text for network service discovery to define wildcard api and feature detection ; http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Oct/0157.html (Jean-Claude)
cathy: jean-claude enables wild card search, a good idea
... independent of the other discussion
... other discussion is to support UPnP devices rather than at service level
… initially I proposed adding search string for UPnP device type
… but we might want to change data model to device model, support UPnP devices naturally, problem is that in mDns there is no device concept
fjh: not sure it makes sense to create a dummy model when abstracting to obtain uniformity
cathy: works if we make device for each service in mdns, thus we can achieve device level for UPnP naturally, but also have it work for others
… need opinion from Rich for this
fjh: looks like we are near reaching a conclusion and consensus
... i would like to schedule a security review with WebAppSec and also a privacy review with PING but am waiting until the specification stabiliizes
… this change wouldn't be ready for TPAC (and WebAppSec is not meeting then anyway)
… so once we get the data model updated then I think we can start reviews
cathy: this should be a fairly big change
fjh: we have a scheduled slot for the privacy review in January with PING so it would be good to get these changes done in November if possible
... no more to discuss, need feedback from Rich
no new information
Updated CfC (ended 29 Oct): http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Oct/0130.html
fjh: we had agreement on call, no disagreement on list
... The CfC has concluded successfully so we can make these changes
ISSUE-151?
<trackbot> ISSUE-151 -- USN should not be used as device identifier -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/151
fjh: this issue includes a proposal, status?
cathy: this needs to be looked at and agreed
fjh: need to revive this on the list
ACTION-666?
<trackbot> ACTION-666 -- Giridhar Mandyam to Check with internal implementers whether vibration api is consistent with chip capabilities -- due 2013-10-17 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/666
gmandyam: still working on this
no other business
fjh: Upcoming calls: next week (7 Nov), week after TPAC (21 Nov), 5 Dec, 12 Dec, 19 Dec
... No call week of TPAC, 14 Nov, no call US Thanksgiving week (28 Nov)