- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 16:06:18 +0100
- To: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
The minutes of today's meeting are at
https://www.w3.org/2016/07/08-dwbp-minutes with a text snapshot below.
The HTML version includes the nice big red resolution to publish the BP
doc as a Candidate recommendation. Current likely date for that
publication is Thursday 21.
Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference
08 Jul 2016
[2]Agenda
[2] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160708
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2016/07/08-dwbp-irc
Attendees
Present
deirdrelee, phila, yaso, annette_g, ericstephan,
Caroline_, BernadetteLoscio, gatemezi, laufer,
hadleybeeman, newton, PeterW
Chair
Deirdre
Scribe
phila/Dee
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Minute approvals
2. [6]BP Doc to CR
3. [7]Implementation form
4. [8]DUV update
* [9]Summary of Action Items
* [10]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<newton> Hello
<deirdrelee> hi newton
<scribe> scribe: phila
<scribe> scribeNick: phila
<deirdrelee> chair: deirdrelee
<deirdrelee> agenda:
[11]https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160708
[11] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160708
Minute approvals
<deirdrelee> PROPOSED: Approve minutes of meeting on 24th June
[12]https://www.w3.org/2016/06/24-dwbp-minutes
[12] https://www.w3.org/2016/06/24-dwbp-minutes
<yaso> +1
<deirdrelee> +1
+0 not present
<ericstephan> +0 horribly absent lately
<annette_g> +1
<BernadetteLoscio> +1
RESOLUTION: Approve minutes of meeting on 24th June
[13]https://www.w3.org/2016/06/24-dwbp-minutes
[13] https://www.w3.org/2016/06/24-dwbp-minutes
<deirdrelee> PROPOSED: Approve minutes of meeting on 1st July
[14]https://www.w3.org/2016/07/01-dwbp-minutes
https://www.w3.org/2016/07/01-dwbp-minutes
+0 not present (again)
<deirdrelee> +1
<ericstephan> +0 again
<Caroline_> +0 not present
<BernadetteLoscio> +1
<gatemezi> +1
<yaso> Already voted :-)
<yaso> +1
RESOLUTION: Approve minutes of meeting on 1st July
[15]https://www.w3.org/2016/07/01-dwbp-minutes
[15] https://www.w3.org/2016/07/01-dwbp-minutes
BP Doc to CR
deirdrelee: We have voted to got to CR but Phil has some admin
that needs to be done.
-> [16]https://www.w3.org/2016/07/dwbp-cr CR prepartion
[16] https://www.w3.org/2016/07/dwbp-cr
phila: That gathers all the info to go to CR
<deirdrelee> phila: we're supposed to contact privacy group on
privacy, we haven't done this, but we've thought about privacy,
and that's documented in CR prep doc
<deirdrelee> ... if anyone has any more feedback on this,
please add
<deirdrelee> ... runs through doc
<deirdrelee> ... hoping that 19th july is date that BP doc is
published as CR
<deirdrelee> ericstephan: what constitutes contacting the
privacy group, i did attend the privacy group meeting and alert
them of draft of bp doc
ericstephan: I alerted the Privacy Wg to the BP draft. They
talked about the privacy questionnaire. They were more
interested in a qualitative assessment
... I also had a separate discussion with the chair.
<Zakim> annette_g, you wanted to ask if my name can be added to
the approval list
<annette_g> You can point to an archived email for me, BTW
<annette_g> s/alos/also
<yaso> I think it's fine, Phila
PROPOSED: That the WG recognises the vote to seek transition to
Candidate Rec for the BP document conducted by e-mail, noting
also the following addition votes
<yaso> +1
<annette_g> +1
<deirdrelee> +1
<ericstephan> +1
+1
<Caroline_> +1
<BernadetteLoscio> +1
<laufer> +1
<newton> +1
<PWinstanley> +1
RESOLUTION: That the WG recognises the vote to seek transition
to Candidate Rec for the BP document conducted by e-mail,
noting also the following addition votes
<yaso> We resolved the resolution o/
->
[17]https://www.w3.org/2016/07/08-dwbp-minutes.html#resolution0
3 The resolution
[17] https://www.w3.org/2016/07/08-dwbp-minutes.html#resolution03
<scribe> chair: Deirdre
<Zakim> Caroline_, you wanted to ask what else should be
included in the BP document before July 19th
<deirdrelee> phila: the document that i created, I will add
annette's name and email from Eric about privacy wg
<deirdrelee> ... but the document itself is now frozen
phila: And Peter W's name
<deirdrelee> deirdrelee: when will directors call happen?
<deirdrelee> phila: request will be put in today, and that
triggers call
<deirdrelee> ... director for this is Philip Legreut
Philippe le Hegeret is the Director for this
phila: Also need at least 1 editor, at least 1 chair, team
contact
<deirdrelee> ... aiming for next week, but let's see, we'll
have a doodle
<deirdrelee> ... depending on everyone's availability
<deirdrelee> BernadetteLoscio: next week will be difficult for
me
<deirdrelee> phila: week after next very likely
<deirdrelee> BernadetteLoscio: we'd also like to know more
about this call - what happens?
<deirdrelee> phila: what they want to know is how doc was
developed,how we're going to get implementation, etc.
<deirdrelee> ... not necessarily content or technical detail of
doc, more about if we've followed the process
<deirdrelee> BernadetteLoscio: do we have to prepare anything?
<deirdrelee> phila: yes, to demonstrate that we've followed the
process
<deirdrelee> BernadetteLoscio: we do this based on the document
phila has prepared?
<deirdrelee> [18]https://www.w3.org/2016/07/dwbp-cr
[18] https://www.w3.org/2016/07/dwbp-cr
<deirdrelee> ... we can use this as a base?
<deirdrelee> ... should we prepare slides?
<annette_g> I found the calendar entry for the SDW WG meeting
that Eric and I attended by Skype. It was March 2.
<deirdrelee> phila: yes, but will double-check will Ralph
->
[19]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2016JulSep/0001
.html Example CR Transition request
[19] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2016JulSep/0001.html
<deirdrelee> ... this is a member space email that i used as a
request to submit transition request
<deirdrelee> deirdrelee: what's involved in the extension?
<deirdrelee> phila: because we're in CR this shouldn't be a
problem, but we should be 4 wks in CR, and then we'll be
outside of charter
<deirdrelee> ... so we need a little while, so we'll go until
sept/oct time
<deirdrelee> ... after CR the next phase is proposed CR, where
w3c members vote on document
<deirdrelee> ... at this stage we won't need calls any more
<annette_g> oops, that SDW meeting was webex, not Skype
<deirdrelee> deirdrelee: phila you'll look after the extension?
<deirdrelee> phila: yep
Implementation form
<newton> [20]http://w3c.br/form-dwbp/
[20] http://w3c.br/form-dwbp/
newton: WE made this form
... I can ask you to test it before we send it to implementers
... You need to provide the organisation info
... then the list of Bps is shown
Caroline_: When we were in Zagreb, we had a list of people we
thought could help us with implementations
... Should we recover that?
phila: I should be able to find it...
deirdrelee: This ties into dissemination. That list from Zagreb
will be useful of course.
... We need to contact people to get that feedback.
... Groups from within the group are valid and important but we
can get more which would be good.
<Caroline_>
[21]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1n6tOphCLXLrzHrdyRUH
Vgrgx1YARdauBQBy9jSJXgDQ/edit
[21]
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1n6tOphCLXLrzHrdyRUHVgrgx1YARdauBQBy9jSJXgDQ/edit
Caroline_: I really like the wiki page you, deirdrelee, created
for the LC review
... A standard e-mail that we can copy will be useful
deirdrelee: Sure
BernadetteLoscio: The BPs at risk maybe...
... I was analysing the test and there are some about which I
have some doubts
... Should I send a message to the group to discuss this?
... How can we proceed.
deirdrelee: How many?
BernadetteLoscio: 8 but that can be because it's not clear for
me that it is possible to test.
<annette_g> I have an issue
newton: The form - I want you to test it and if you have an
issue filling it in, we can change it
<annette_g> in Safari and Firefox
<annette_g> will send an email
<laufer> newton, we can put draft data in this test phase?
<newton> @annette_g I used javascript to make assynchronous
request
phila: 8 BPs we're not sure about? That's worrying having just
resolved to go to CR
<annette_g> javascript should be fine
<newton> @laufer yes, you can fill the form and make tests,
after we can reset it and send to all implementers
BernadetteLoscio: BP5, we say chaeck if a user agent can
automatically discover the licence
... For that, we need to implemetn a crawler or something
<annette_g> SyntaxError: Unexpected token '='. Expected a ')'
or a ',' after a parameter declaration.
BernadetteLoscio: No sure if we should create a crawler
<hadleybeeman> phila: for BP8, I would simply use curl
phila: Use cURL to get the full HTTP load
<annette_g> clicking the different tests doesn't make any
changes. When I fill in and submit the org info, I get some
json back.
<newton> @annette_g Firefox and chrome worked here for me. Now
I'm having issues with safari too.
<annette_g> I don't see a way to do anything other than submit
the org info.
<hadleybeeman> phila: but you don't have to build a client that
understands and recognises licenses. We have a separate working
group for that.
BernadetteLoscio: And for BP 16 and 20...
<newton> @annette_g you were supposed to get this json in an
assyc request (via AJAX), but it seems to be broken and not
working on Safari
BernadetteLoscio: 16 is about vocabularies and 20 is not clear
for me
deirdrelee: For BP 6 and 8 etc. A lot of the stuff we have
implemeted automatically test for a lot of those things so we,
Ireland, have them
... And to prove and implementation, we're not asking for a
demo, we're taking people on trust.
... If they say their work passes, it passes.
... I don't think anyone has to build anything new.
... This harvester shows the licence etc.
ack
annette_g: Noting the nature of the doc, anything that made the
list of all should be something that we feel are common enough
to be findable.
BernadetteLoscio: I was in doubt about some BPs as I don't do
that type of implementation
... So I just wanted to be sure that it's possible
... But I think it's not a problem if we have one or two BPs
that we're not really sure about then we should say it.
deirdrelee: Anyone else with concerns?
newton: I was in douibt about BP 26
[22]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/publishing-snapshots/CR-dwbp-2016
0706/#avoidBreakingChangesAPI
... How can we validate that one?
... With no feedback, we'll lose that BP
[22]
http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/publishing-snapshots/CR-dwbp-20160706/#avoidBreakingChangesAPI
deirdrelee: If we have an API that has changed, and a record
about how it has changed, then we're OK.
... It's about communication.
newton: I know it's a BP, but if we don't have any real world
cases where the API has changed and not broken, I don't know
how to validate it.
annette_g: The test is looking to see if people have a test
version - that's what we need to show. That's why it's written
that way.
deirdrelee: I'm thinking of APIs that we have here and
Twitter's API, when it changes, they communicate that.
... If we're concerned about them then we should label them as
Feature at Risk
<hadleybeeman> phila: Sorry, but if your'e talking about now
marking things at risk, or reviewing — you've lost your CR
resolution.
<hadleybeeman> ...Sorry, but you're talking about making
changes to the document.
<hadleybeeman> ...Those things go into the CR decision.
<hadleybeeman> ...You can't do it after you've resolved to
publish at CR.
phila: Explains what CR resolution means
<hadleybeeman> ...So either what you've got is fine, and you're
ready to go — or you start again. A director would say you're
talking about being back at working draft.
deirdrelee: I think it's a bit of anxiety
<ericstephan> won't the bp be eliminated naturally if there are
no implementation examples?
deirdrelee: As Annete said, we wouldn't have them there if we
diodn't think they are BPs. We should gather implementation
experience and take that.
BernadetteLoscio: I'm sorry but I didn't explain what I had in
mind.
... I don't want to make changes at anything. It's because
we're going to make some implementations and I wanted to know
how to test some stuff.
... It's more like this than actually changing something.
deirdrelee: The process of starting to gather implementations
... That will give us a better picture of where we are.
ericstephan: I think the implementation experience is the
important one now.
<laufer> I think that one thing is to test if one of our BPs
was implemented. Another thing is to assert that the BP is a
BP.
deirdrelee: Anyone have any real concerns about any BPs being
at risk?
... OK.
<hadleybeeman> +1 to laufer
<newton> I recorded my screen in this GIF
[23]http://imgur.com/J0swYOQ showing what should happen when
you fill the organization info and submit it
[23] http://imgur.com/J0swYOQ
deirdrelee: You want people to test that the form is OK. Sounds
as if Annette might have found some bugs but let's see.
... I suggest we all have a go and use the form this week. Who
knows, by this time next week we might have 2 implementations
for BP!
... We can see where were getting lots of implementation and
where we need more
newton: Before we send the form abroad, we should first send
the form to the WG and then I can fix the bugs.
deirdrelee: Can we not just start using it and if we find a
bug, tell you?
<annette_g> It's completely unusable for me.
<gatemezi> +1 to deirdrelee proposal
Caroline_: Wait until the end of the day... we're tweaking.
<gatemezi> We start using the form
<gatemezi> ah ok Caroline_
deirdrelee: OK, we'll start using it from Monday.
... Thanks to Newton and co for all the effort to create the
form!
<hadleybeeman> +1 to the approach :)
<laufer> Thanks, newton.
<Caroline_> +1 to thanking newton
<gatemezi> Thanks newton and folks
<hadleybeeman> Thanks newton!!
<newton> we're welcome
deirdrelee: So we can talk about dissemination next Friday.
<newton> please, file bugs and send it to us and we can fix
them before start using in production
<newton> :-)
DUV update
ericstephan: We had contact from someone ineterested in DUV nad
wanted to include it the LOV
... They had some suggested improvements
... Berna and I need to go over it in the coming week. I also
addressed an old action
phila: Thanks
<deirdrelee>
[24]https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/List_of_DUV_implementatio
ns
[24] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/List_of_DUV_implementations
deirdrelee: Great news about LOV
... It would be good to have implementation news for the 2
vocabs, including planned implementations
<BernadetteLoscio>
[25]https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/List_of_DUV_implementatio
ns
[25] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/List_of_DUV_implementations
ericstephan: I notice that the DQV team, was listing
publications,. We had an AGU submission accepted.
... Hopefully we'll get Bernadette to attend in December
... So I can list those.
deirdrelee: AOB?
... So Phil will follow up on the Director's call.
<ericstephan> get ready....get set....IMPLEMENT and DOCUMENT!
<hadleybeeman> :)
<yaso1> Great!
deirdrelee: And everyone needs to start using the form and next
Friday we can look at dissemination.
<BernadetteLoscio> thanks!
<yaso1> Bye all
<laufer> bye all!
<annette_g> bye!
<newton> bye
<deirdrelee> RRSAgent: generate minutes
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
1. [26]Approve minutes of meeting on 24th June
https://www.w3.org/2016/06/24-dwbp-minutes
2. [27]Approve minutes of meeting on 1st July
https://www.w3.org/2016/07/01-dwbp-minutes
3. [28]That the WG recognises the vote to seek transition to
Candidate Rec for the BP document conducted by e-mail,
noting also the following addition votes
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Received on Friday, 8 July 2016 15:05:27 UTC