- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 09:48:04 -0500
- To: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the March 4 Widgets voice conference are available at the following and copied below: http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-wam-minutes.html WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send them to the public-webapps mail list before March 18 (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 04 Mar 2010 [2]Agenda [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/ 2010JanMar/0741.html See also: [3]IRC log [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-wam-irc Attendees Present Art, Bryan, Marcos, Robin, Arve, StevenP Regrets Marcin Chair Art Scribe Art Contents * [4]Topics 1. [5]Review and tweak agenda 2. [6]Announcements? 3. [7]P&C spec: <span> element and dir attribute 4. [8]WARP spec 5. [9]URI scheme spec 6. [10]View Modes Media Feature spec 7. [11]AOB * [12]Summary of Action Items _________________________________________________________ <darobin> joining in a split second! <scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB <scribe> Scribe: Art Date: 4 March 2010 Review and tweak agenda AB: the draft agenda was posted on March 3 ( [13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JanMar/07 41.html ). Will add View Modes Media Features to the agenda since Robin posted an update today ( [14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JanMar/07 45.html ). Any other change requests? [13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/ 2010JanMar/0741.html [14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/ 2010JanMar/0745.html Announcements? AB: I have one: No call next week on March 11; next call will be March 18. Any other short announcements? P&C spec: <span> element and dir attribute AB: earlier this week Marcos submitted a proposal on how to address the <span> element and dir attribute ( [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JanMar/07 15.html ). [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/ 2010JanMar/0715.html MC: I'm waiting to see what the I18N WG says ... I added <span> and dir attr to the spec ... but I have not spec'ed he behavior ... we want to defer the proc model to a sepearate spec AB: is that proving to be problematic? MC: it's a bit complicated ... the bidi stuff that is ... if dir attr is set globally, need to set limits ... some stuff such as IRI interaction isn't clear ... for example <name> has a short name ... could have name in English and short name in Hebrew AB: are you having a diaglog with I18N group? MC: they were supposed to discuss it yesterday ... haven't seen their minutes yet ... Scott and Addison have been discussing it ... not clear how attrs are affected by direction AB: what's the prior art? MC: HTML5 ... but I think it is underspecified AB: other formats? MC: SVG is likely ... so we could check it AB: I would expect a lot of languages RB: SMIL, XForms, etc. <darobin> ... DocBook, TEI AB: can we minimize the changes to P&C and defer all processing to the separate spec? MC: yes, that's the intent but not clear if we can get that ... when an impl gets back a dir string, it's got additional semantics in it SP: can't we just use CSS for this? ... CSS has a rule that matches bidi algorithm MC: there is no style associated with config.xml ... that is also discouraged in some places e.g. HTML5 ... the behavior we are looking for is indeed defined in CSS SP: can't we just say the text included behaves the same rules as CSS MC: yes, that is part of the solution ... but there are additional issues too AB: let's pause to see if the I18N WG has posted their minutes from yesterday's discussion MC: yes, sure AB: I just checked their archive and see no postings on March 3 or 4 <Steven> [16]http://www.w3.org/2010/03/03-pf-minutes.html [16] http://www.w3.org/2010/03/03-pf-minutes.html <Steven> is that it? AB: OK, so what is the plan of action MC: need to continue the investigation ... in my last email to them I asked them questions ... we need to get their answers <scribe> ACTION: barstow followup with Richard and Addison re the <span> and dir attribute discussions [recorded in [17]http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-wam-minutes.html#action01] <trackbot> Created ACTION-506 - Followup with Richard and Addison re the <span> and dir attribute discussions [on Arthur Barstow - due 2010-03-11]. AB: the draft agenda includes a discussion on the Widget BiDi spec ... I presume there is no need to discuss that now MC: yes, that's correct; we need to get feedback from I18N WG ... this is a new and complex area AB: ok; understood; KUTGW WARP spec AB: the WARP PAG is still in progress and we may continue to work on the spec ( [18]http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-access/ ). Two questions here: what is the status of LC comment responses ( [19]http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/WD-widgets-a ccess-20091208/ ) and what is the status of the test suite? [18] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-access/ [19] http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/WD- widgets-access-20091208/ RB: I think there is only 1 LC comment ... and it was from Dom and is straight forward ... I'll follow-up today AB: my recollection is there are two but I'll need to do some searching RB: I'll check too AB: Marcos, you will object to WARP going to CR without a test suite? MC: yes that is correct AB: a question is, who is willing to work on the test suite? SP: what's the problem with entering CR without a test suite? MC: we have had problems with other specs because there was no TS ... it caused us to have to create multiple CRs SP: OK AB: so, is anyone willing to contribute to the WARP TS? MC: we need another server to test against ... need that for cross-domain access <darobin> [we can test with www and dev] MC: think we can use dev.w3.org and then my server or RB's server AB: so finding the servers doesn't seem like a big factor MC: could potentially do everything on one server if diff ports are used RB: could use www.w3.org and dev.w3.org ... so think we'll be fine MC: ok; let's do it that way ... if RB could follow the pattern I used, that would be great RB: I can help if you MC: but I can help set up the infra ... but that's not the test cases RB: understood ... if you set up the infra, I'll create the tests AB: did I capture your agreements properly? RB: yes MC: yes ... are we talking about 20 tests or so? ... but could be more like 100 RB: seriously doubt it will reach that high AB: thanks MC and RB URI scheme spec AB: Robin, did you respond to Julian Reschke's 25-Feb comment ( [20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JanMar/07 13.html )? [20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/ 2010JanMar/0713.html RB: not yet ... I will respond to the three comments View Modes Media Feature spec AB: earlier today Robin announced a new ED of the VMMF spec ( [21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JanMar/07 45.html ). [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/ 2010JanMar/0745.html <darobin> [22]http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-vmmf/Overview.html [22] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-vmmf/Overview.html RB: it's really simple ... defines one media feature ... since it is a UI-related spec, we can't be overly constraining ... the spec says UA should make a "best-effort" attempt AB: any comments? ... I like the simplicity ... as well as providing the freedom for the UA to do-the-right-thing ... what about a heads-up to CSS WG and if so, what list do we use? RB: yes, we should; I suggest www-style AB: what do people think about starting a 2-week pre-LCWD comment review period? <darobin> +1 RB: think that's a good idea MC: agree Arve: yes AB: any objections? <Steven> I'm OK with that AB: OK, I'll start that review ... and then I'll forward that announcement to www-style ... OK? RB: Yes, Mr Barstow <scribe> ACTION: barstow start a 2-week pre-LCWD review period for the VMMF spec [recorded in [23]http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-wam-minutes.html#action02] <trackbot> Created ACTION-507 - Start a 2-week pre-LCWD review period for the VMMF spec [on Arthur Barstow - due 2010-03-11]. AB: who is willing to contribute to the test suite? ... could be a pretty thin test suite RB: there is only 1 normative assertion and it is a SHOULD MC: could be about 10 test case ... there are 5 states plus error conditions ... there is also the fallback behavior AB: anything else on this for today? [ No ] AOB AB: Next and last call in March is March 18 (no calls on March 11 or 25) ... Heads-up: time for March 18 will be the same in US but 1 hour earlier in Europe (14:00 Paris) ... would that be problematic? RB: should be ok SP: US changes on Marc 13? AB: yes RB: I must send regrets for the 18th AB: any other business for today? ... Meeting Adjourned <Steven> bye Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: barstow followup with Richard and Addison re the <span> and dir attribute discussions [recorded in [24]http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-wam-minutes.html#action01] [NEW] ACTION: barstow start a 2-week pre-LCWD review period for the VMMF spec [recorded in [25]http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-wam-minutes.html#action02] [End of minutes]
Received on Thursday, 4 March 2010 14:49:26 UTC