- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 10:05:21 -0400
- To: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the May 14 Widgets voice conference are
available at the following and copied below:
<http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-wam-minutes.html>
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webapps mail list before 21 May 2009 (the next
Widgets voice conference); otherwise these minutes will be considered
Approved.
-Regards, Art Barstow
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Widgets Voice Conference
14 May 2009
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009AprJun/0528.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-wam-irc
Attendees
Present
Art, Jere, Marcos, AndyS, Arve
Regrets
Thomas, Robin, David, Nick, Marcin, AndyB
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Review and tweak agenda
2. [6]Announcements
3. [7]P&C spec: Status of completing L10N model
4. [8]P&C spec: Base folder and resolution of relative paths
5. [9]P&C spec: <access> element and Security Model
6. [10]P&C spec: viewmodes proposal
7. [11]A&E spec: Red Block Issues in the spec
8. [12]A&E spec: What needs to be done to before the LCWD can
be published?
9. [13]AOB
* [14]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
Date: 14 May 2009
Review and tweak agenda
AB: draft agenda sent to the mail list on 13 May
([15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009AprJun/0
528.html). I'll add a P&C LC status and plan topic. Any other change
requests?
[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009AprJun/0528.html).
Announcements
AB: I don't have any announcements. Does anyone?
[ None ]
P&C spec: Status of completing L10N model
AB: Marcos, Jere and Robin had a prolonged IRC discussion on 13 May
([16]http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/webapps/20090513). What's the
status Marcos?
[16] http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/webapps/20090513).
MC: we looked at the essence of Francois' suggestions
... they make sense so we began working thru the details for a
widget engine
... this simplifies a lot of things in the model
... main changes are to lookup mechanism
... fundamental model is the same
... there is no notion of a base folder any more and thus xml base
is not needed
AB: what percent of the l10n model is now done?
MC: about 80%
<Marcos_> Rule for Finding Files within a Widget Package
MC: with Jere's help, eliminated Step 5
<Marcos_> Step 5 - Derive the User Agent's locale
MC: but there is a new Step 5
... how the UA gets the list of locales is not specified
AB: what is the plan to complete the remaining 20%?
MC: I will ask Francois for comments on what we have done
<Marcos> have I just been rambling?
AS: where is the latest version?
AB: [17]http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/
[17] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/
<Marcos> while disconnected?
<Marcos> bah
<Marcos> reconnecting
<Marcos> reconnecting
AB: Jere, is MC waiting on any inputs from you?
JK: no; I gave him the info; I just need to review the edits, just
like Francois
<arve> By the way, apologies for calling in late, I've been to
another meeting
AB: I would prefer to complete the model now, publish the LC and
then ask Francois and the I18N WG for comments
MC: I agree, let's do that
AB: any comments on my proposal?
[ None ]
AS: I support that
AB: MC, when can you have the edits completed?
MC: by May 15 can have first set of edits in
... but Robin and I need to work together on that
AB: is there some review Jere could do now that would be helpful?
MC: yes; Step 5
AB: Marcos, when you have completed your edits, will you send a
notification to the list?
MC: yes
P&C spec: Base folder and resolution of relative paths
AB: Francois continued the base folder discussion (
[18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009AprJun/05
18.html). Marcos, have the concerns Francois raised been reflected
in the latest ED?
[18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009AprJun/0518.html).
MC: I think this is now addressed but not positive
<JereK> Look also at
[19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009AprJun/05
27.html
[19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009AprJun/0527.html
MC: Jere, what do you think?
JK: yes, I think so
... we used his comments when we worked on our design
P&C spec: <access> element and Security Model
AB: last week we had a relatively long discussion on the <access>
element and the associated Security Model
([20]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/07-wam-minutes.html#item04).
... we will continue that discussion including: status; what must be
specified for v1 (without causing backward compatibility problems
for v2); normative vs. non-normative Security Considerations; plan
to complete the model.
... Spec:
([21]http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/#the-access-element).
Thread:
([22]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009AprJun/0
514.html). IRC discussion:
([23]http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/webapps/20090512).
[20] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/07-wam-minutes.html#item04).
[21] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/#the-access-element).
[22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009AprJun/0514.html).
[23] http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/webapps/20090512).
MC: I think the access element is about 50% complete
AB: we are missing both Thomas and Robin
... so we will cut this topic short
... Thomas will be available on Monday
MC: a separate telecon on this would be helpful
<scribe> ACTION: barstow organize a telco for Widgets Security Model
on May 18 or 19 [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-wam-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-341 - Organize a telco for Widgets
Security Model on May 18 or 19 [on Arthur Barstow - due 2009-05-21].
AB: anything else on this?
... Arve, Marcos, what is your avail on May 18 or 19?
Arve: I am not avail after 14:00
AB: ok
P&C spec: viewmodes proposal
AB: On May 8 Marcos proposed text for the viewmodes attribute
([25]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009AprJun/0
515.html). The discussion digressed a bit and I don't believe anyone
objected to the proposal. The proposal seems reasonable to me.
Marcos, what's the status?
[25] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009AprJun/0515.html).
MC: I added my proposal to the spec
AB: any comments on this?
[ None ]
A&E spec: Red Block Issues in the spec
AB: the latest ED ([26]http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/) of
the A&E has some Red Block issues. Want to discuss these and get
commitments for inputs to address them.
... there is a big red block in Section 5 after the Widget interface
[26] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/)
MC: this is C+P from an email that pointed out some inconsistencies
... I need to sync the two specs
AB: need to sync definitions?
MC: definitions and behavior too
AB: is this related to the instantiation thread?
<Marcos>
[27]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009AprJun/04
61.html
[27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009AprJun/0461.html
MC: no, that was URI spec
AB: do you need some help on this issue Marcos?
MC: if Arve has some feedback, that would be good
... I need to review A+E and P+C for consistency
AB: I agree we need consistency but this doesn't seem critical i.e.
we could fix during LC
... next one is in Section 5.1 viewMode Attr
MC: the definition in this spec is wrong
Arve: what is wrong?
MC: the value of window widget mode is defined in P+C
Arve: this is the result of lacking a Widget UA spec
AB: can we create a "good enuf" solution to get this spec to LC?
MC: we can remove the dependency on P+C and make it on Window Modes
spec
... the depedency in sec 5.1 is wrong and must be updated
AB: what's the priority Marcos of P+C and A+E?
MC: the priority is P+C
AB: Arve, what is your prio to address these A+E issues?
Arve: I can't get to them until May 19 at the earliest
<scribe> ACTION: Barstow send request to the WG to supply inputs for
the A+E Red Block Issues [recorded in
[28]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-wam-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-342 - Send request to the WG to supply
inputs for the A+E Red Block Issues [on Arthur Barstow - due
2009-05-21].
Arve: re the Red Block issue in 5.12, this is straight forward edits
... re the issue in 5.14, I don't understand the issue
MC: I raised it
... this needs to align with what is spec'ed in P+C
AB: I am unconvinced this needs to be specified
MC: the feature element needs normalization
AB: is there any prior art in the spec world?
JK: the URI spec has some related text. TLR has a view on this.
AB: so how do we move forward on this?
<scribe> ACTION: Marcos send an email to the mail list re URI
normalization [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-wam-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-343 - Send an email to the mail list re
URI normalization [on Marcos Caceres - due 2009-05-21].
Arve: re ACKS and Norm Refs section, we just need to complete the
info
AB: any volunteers to help with these Appendix?
MC: we can fix these after we get to LC
<scribe> ACTION: Barstow submit input for A+E's Normative References
[recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-wam-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-344 - Submit input for A+E's Normative
References [on Arthur Barstow - due 2009-05-21].
AB: I think the Norm Refs should be completed before LC is published
Arve: I agree
MC: OK; I'll do it
RESOLUTION: we will update A+E's Normative Refs before we publish
LCWD
A&E spec: What needs to be done to before the LCWD can be published?
AB: yesterday I started a thread
([31]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009AprJun/0
525.html) to gather a list of issues and actions that must be
completed before we can publish a LCWD of the A&E spec. I don't
believe there were any responses so we'll take some time now to
create that list. Naturally, we don't need to discuss the Red Block
Issues in the ED. Arve, Marcos, let's start with you.
[31] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009AprJun/0525.html)
MC: I need to do a thorough review
Arve: I also need to do a thorough review
... I think there are some stylistic issues to make
... and some editorial changes
... but no new features
AB: anything else that is mandatory to do before LCWD is published?
[ None ]
AOB
AB: I don't have anything
... anyone else?
[ None ]
AB: Meeting Adjourned
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: barstow organize a telco for Widgets Security Model on
May 18 or 19 [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-wam-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Barstow send request to the WG to supply inputs for
the A+E Red Block Issues [recorded in
[33]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-wam-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Barstow submit input for A+E's Normative References
[recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-wam-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Marcos send an email to the mail list re URI
normalization [recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-wam-minutes.html#action03]
[End of minutes]
Received on Thursday, 14 May 2009 14:07:02 UTC