W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2016

[minutes] 20160405 HTML Editors

From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 17:44:41 -0400
To: public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <570431C9.9090900@w3.org>
Available at
  https://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html

Text version:

                               HTML editors

05 Apr 2016

    See also: [2]IRC log

       [2] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-irc

Attendees

    Present
           chaals, plh, steveF, alexD, Leonie, Travis, Arron

    Chair
           chaals

    Scribe
           plh

Contents

      * [3]Topics
          1. [4]timeline
          2. [5]Interop testing
          3. [6]Bug Triage
          4. [7]Getting up to speed
          5. [8]Next meeting
      * [9]Summary of Action Items
      * [10]Summary of Resolutions
      __________________________________________________________

timeline

    Chaals: goal is to ship a REC within this charter
    ... which means PR in August
    ... and CR by mid-June to run the patent clock
    ... so 2 variables
    ... do we get enough stuff done by then?
    ... and do we get consensus from the WG?
    ... the approach is:
    ... lots of changes: ficaption, summary, etc.
    ... things that didn't make into HTML 5
    ... we'd like to improve editorially as much as we can

    Steve: can we change tyhings during CR period?

    Chaals: yes, but we assume we'll have a branch
    ... and we'll leave it alone at that point
    ... and do changes on 5.2

    Steve: so CR by mid-June. this gives us 2 months

    Chaals: yes
    ... we won't get everything we'd like by then

    Steve: when do we identify things to be pulled out?

    Chaals: I'm going to start later tonight Call for Consensus
    ... but if things don't work, they should go
    ... like outline stuff
    ... accesskey
    ... this dooesn't work

    Steve: accesskey attribute?

    Chaals: no the changes between html 4 and html 5 are all
    fantasy
    ... html 5 stuff should be reverted

    Steve: re outline algo
    ... it's no problem sitting since he doesn't have requirements
    ... but it needs better explanation
    ... and needs to be broken out
    ... [...]

    Chaals: if it's an element that never got implemented, we just
    pull it out
    ... we might need call for consensus for some
    ... substantive changes should be justified
    ... and be accompanied by tests

    Alex: what about updates to the WD?

    Chaals: montly
    ... next update is next week

    PLH: WOuld like to take the snapshot Friday for publication

    CMN: Seems fair, I'll shoot for Friday then.

    Plh: I'll take whatever is in the repo on Friday then

Interop testing

    Chaals: approach is that we want tests to justify changes
    ... HTML 5.0 got through an interop test
    ... if all the changes that we make come with tests, that
    should be a no brainer to go back to the Director
    ... while I would like to have tests for the testharness, it's
    not a requirement
    ... just a nice to have
    ... so manual tests are fine
    ... in the long term, we'll keep doing better

    Leonie: is there any template or structure for tests?

    Chaals: yes
    ... testharness

    Plh: I'm happy to help

    <scribe> ACTION: plh to organize a testharness teaching session
    [recorded in
    [11]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action01]

      [11] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action01]

    Chaals: anounce it to public-html

    Plh: I'll organize a doodle poll

    Charles: does the testing plan make sense to you?

    Plh: yes, as long as we cut out features that are not
    implemented enough

    Charles: agreed. nothing should stop us from being ruthless

    Leonie: do we have a list of things to remove?

    Charles: I have 4

    Travis: +1 to cut

    Alex: what's our bar? 2 browsers

    Steve: are we going to vary from the HTML5 exit criteria?
    ... it was 2 rendering engines

    Travis: it was passive permissive
    ... because it was widely deployed

    Chaals: other parts have not been tested and were never
    implemented
    ... so a c ouple of engines
    ... but there is no general rule at W3C
    ... having implementers swearing they'll do it might be
    convincing

    <SteveF> exit criteria for html5
    [12]https://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/public-permissive-
    exit-criteria.html

      [12] 
https://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/public-permissive-exit-criteria.html

    Chaals: but having implementers saying they'd like to remove
    it, might make it the other way

    <chaals> "is sufficiently clear, complete, and relevant to
    market needs, to ensure that independent interoperable
    implementations of each feature of the specification will be
    realized"

    Steve: we need to have those rules written down
    ... why not just reused the ones from HTML5?
    ... and do a Call for Consensus to use that again

    Plh: to give a little background on the criteria
    ... the goal was to use passive permissive for old html4
    features, like tables
    ... and make sure we had tests for the new HTML 5.0 features
    ... but some things fell into cracks, like mediaGroup
    ... we would have never shipped mediaGroup in HTML 5.0 if we
    had realized it wasn't implemented.

    <Zakim> chaals, you wanted to say yeah, let's make something
    based on those criteria

    <LJWatson> +1 to public permissive v3 exit criteria

    Chaals: If we make these requirements part of the acceptance
    for each change, then when we enter CR, we don't need to spend
    a month writing a full test report

    Steve: we've got to have something to define our criteria
    ... because people we'll be asking questions
    ... reusing the ones from HTML 5.0 means the work is already
    done for us
    ... if we spit up the spec and flag things up for removal...

    Arron: I have a tool that can run through the APIs in the spec
    ... how about I create issues on those who don't have 2
    implementations?
    ... I'll raise issues

    [All: +1]

    Arron: I hope to have the info in the next 2 or 3 minutes. it's
    a public tool

    <arronei> [13]http://aka.ms/apicatalog/

      [13] http://aka.ms/apicatalog/

    Chaals: I'll setup a call for consensus to the Group for the
    exit criteria

    <scribe> ACTION: Charles to get the Group to decide on the HTMl
    exit criteria [recorded in
    [14]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action02]

      [14] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action02]

    <chaals> ACTION: Chaals to CfC on "exit criteria" as a
    requirement for accepting any change [recorded in
    [15]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action03]

      [15] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action03]

    <scribe> ACTION: Arron will enter issues based on API
    implementation feedback [recorded in
    [16]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action04]

      [16] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action04]

Bug Triage

    Chaals: we cleaned out the a11y bugs and give action items away
    ... but there are a bunch of other bugs from bugzilla
    ... how do we triage github issues?

    <LJWatson>
    [17]http://github.adrianba.net/webstandards/HTML5-bugs.htm

      [17] http://github.adrianba.net/webstandards/HTML5-bugs.htm

    Plh: asking the editors to sort out which bugs are 5.1 would be
    good

    <scribe> ACTION: Plh to create a milesone 5.1 in the repo
    [recorded in
    [18]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action05]

      [18] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action05]

    Travis: what happened to the issues we don't migrate?

    Chaals: they'll disapear over time

    Travis: incubator group project?

    Chaals: yes. the bugs might come back again however

    Leonie: let's finish the a11 bugs this week
    ... and see where we are after that

    Arron: we'll look into organizing a bug triage call

Getting up to speed

    Chaals: do you feel in control?
    ... or need help in figuring things out?

    Travis: curious how we get the commmunity involved in
    discussing the issues
    ... we could divolve into a benevolent editor situation but we
    should be more inclusive
    ... how do we say that an issue needs someone to look into it?
    ... does it jump out of the incubation group?

    Chaals: we have a label for question for the WG in github
    ... and we need to practice that
    ... once we start doing that, we'll need a tradition of
    answering :)
    ... the WhATWG spec is removing a lot of semantic elements

    Steve: was an Aprils' fools

    Chaals: yes

    Steve: to get the Group involved, we'll need to write to them

    Plh: weekly report? Twitter?

    Travis: I'd like to ask people in the trenches

    Plh: we can use the w3c twitter account

    Steve: and point people to the github issue

    [19]https://twitter.com/htmlwg

      [19] https://twitter.com/htmlwg

    Steve: we can build it up

    <scribe> ACTION: plh to find who has access to @htmlwg
    [recorded in
    [20]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action06]

      [20] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action06]

    Chaals: linking stuff in bikeshed
    ... seems black art to me

    Arron: I know how to link things

    Alex: getting the community involved is important and getting
    things on github is also good rather than email

    Chaals: formal comments need to be put into GitHub

Next meeting

    April 26, same time 2000 Zulu

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: Arron will enter issues based on API
    implementation feedback [recorded in
    [21]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action04]
    [NEW] ACTION: Chaals to CfC on "exit criteria" as a requirement
    for accepting any change [recorded in
    [22]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action03]
    [NEW] ACTION: Charles to get the Group to decide on the HTMl
    exit criteria [recorded in
    [23]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action02]
    [NEW] ACTION: Plh to create a milesone 5.1 in the repo
    [recorded in
    [24]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action05]
    [NEW] ACTION: plh to find who has access to @htmlwg [recorded
    in [25]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action06]
    [NEW] ACTION: plh to organize a testharness teaching session
    [recorded in
    [26]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action01]

      [21] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action04
      [22] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action03
      [23] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action02
      [24] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action05
      [25] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action06
      [26] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/05-html-minutes.html#action01

Summary of Resolutions

    [End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2016 21:44:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 5 April 2016 21:44:44 UTC