- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:04:46 +0800
- To: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
The Draft minutes from WebApps' November 11 f2f meeting [Agenda] are at
the following and copied below:
<http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-webapps-minutes.html>
Corrections, comments, etc., are welcome.
Thanks very much to the various scribes.
-AB
[Agenda] <http://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/November2013Meeting>
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
WebApps F2F Meeting @ TPAC 2013
11 Nov 2013
[2]Agenda
[2] http://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/November2013Meeting
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-webapps-irc
Attendees
Present
+1.503.264.aaaa, [IPcaller], Shenzhen, +1.503.264.aabb,
James_Craig, Rich_Schwerdtfeger, Art_Barstow, aizu,
Arnaud_Braud, Mete_Balci, Chaals_Nevile, Jungkee_Song,
Bryan_Sullivan, Jonas_Sicking, Cameron_McCormack,
Adam_Boyet, Adrian_Bateman, Daniel_Austin, Ed_OConnor,
Elit_Graff, Gary_Kacmarcik, James_Graham, Ryosuke_Niwa,
Travis_Leithead, Paul_cotton, Xiaoqian_Wu, Robin_Berjon,
Takayoshi_Kochi, Kinuko_Yasuda, Anne_van_Kesteren,
Alex_Russell, Richard_Tibbett, Mark_Nottingham,
Dirk_Schulze, Rik_Cabanier
Regrets
Chair
Art, Chaals
Scribe
Cameron, Travis_, Travis
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Agenda bashing
2. [6]PubStatus
3. [7]SSE status
4. [8]Charter Status
5. [9]IME
6. [10]Joint Meeting with IndieUI WG
7. [11]DOM 3 Events & UI Events
8. [12]D3E and UI Events
9. [13]Quota API
10. [14]ServiceWorkers
11. [15]Streams
12. [16]XHR and Progress Events
13. [17]WebIDL
14. [18]Readonly/ writeable interfaces
* [19]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________
<tomoyuki> +Present Tomoyuki_Shimizu
<tomoyuki> -Present Tomoyuki_Shimizu
<ArtB> ScribeNick: heycam
<ArtB> Scribe: Cameron
Agenda bashing
chaals: we have a couple of items already fixed
... at 1:30 the Indie UI people will come and talk to us
... they sent us a new proposal
... they'll talk about that
... at 5:00pm we have a couple of things locked in
... there's also a pile of topics we want
... DOM 3 Events, File API, ....
... we have a couple of requests to have Streams/XHR
discussions after lunch, not between 2 and 2:30
... I suggest we push them later
... any preferences for discussing any topics?
shepazu: I think for people who aren't native English speakers,
we're on IRC
... anyone need help getting started with that?
... IRC is helpful as the scribe types what everyone is saying
... find me and I can help you
chaals: so Streams and XHR, between those two do we want an
hour?
... half an hour each?
... jungkee does that sound right?
jungkee: I also want to join Sys Apps for service worker
introduction, which will happen this afternoon
... I don't really know what time that will be
... I'll speak to the SysApps chairs to organise a time
... so I'm OK with that
... can I talk about Progress Events at the same time?
chaals: yes
... do we want to talk about URLs?
... next, Interop and Testing issues
... tomorrow afternoon
ArtB: I can't get to the page right now; we have I think about
6 specs that are in CR right now
... including Progress Events
... for each of those I'd like to get a sense of where we're
going with those
... who's interested in helping, what are the issues
... that's a bit different from the block set aside for
tomorrow afternoon
... jgraham agreed to split that session into the test
framework we use, reviewing tests
... and the second half creating tests
... for today's agenda, interop and testing, I think I'd rather
do that tomorrow morning
chaals: we can more or less randomly distribute the rest of the
topics
... unless someone has a preference
... so let's just put them in in the order they appear
... we have DOM 3 Events, File APIs, IME API, Quota API
... Streams/XHR we've already git
... and UI Events
Travis_MSFT: I think we can probably combine the discussion on
DOM 3 Events with UI Events
... so don't need separate blocks for those
chaals: should we just do that first?
... first we'll go through all of our specs
... for a status update; then we'll deal with the specs that
need discussion
... first will be DOM 3 Events & UI
ArtB: that OK Gary?
gary: sounds fine
Travis_MSFT: can we do that in the afternoon? I want to attend
WebRTC in the morning
<paulc> Time difference between Shenzhen and Eastern Time is
currently + 13 hours.
sicking: if we can do it early he could call in. 11:30.
chaals: IME at 12?
ArtB: we need Mike Smith for that
chaals: let's put it provisionally at 12
gary: he's busy in the Testing thing
ArtB: Quota API at 14:30
... will we do the File System API at the same time as File
API?
sicking: yes
hober: Mike is fine for that time
<shepazu> /me can people on the phone hear us?
<wayneCarr> heard nothing before
PubStatus
<wayneCarr> can hear now but not understand
chaals: we'll go through each of the specs we work on
<ArtB> [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/PubStatus
[20] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/PubStatus
chaals: the first spec is AppCache NG
... we have a proposal from Jonas
... and we have Service Workers that Alex is working on
somewhere
... do we know what his plan is?
ArtB: jungkee you said Alex was going to go through it at
SysApps?
... can we get him to present here?
jungkees: SysApps WG is working on some runtime design and
speccing etc.
... and now a concept like Google's Event Page has been
proposed at the last F2F
... after that, Marcos from Mozilla proposed we align our
efforts with Service Workers
... since that covers basically the same requirements and use
cases
... making the application offline
... so that's the bottom line
... the co-chair of SysApps invited Alex Russell to introduce
his Service Worker work this afternoon
... I heard that Alex has a meeting with the TAG this morning
... not sure about the schedule
chaals: we have an open session at 3pm
... can we do that together with Sys Apps then?
jungkees: I think that'd be really nice
... SysApps are also talking about an application model
jungkee: SysApps' charter was for application manifests, etc.
like on FirefoxOS
... IMO they are two different ways of implementing the same
goals
... for offline webapps
... so at some point we need to talk about that together
chaals: let's hope to do that at 3pm
... next items is CORS
... we don't have Anne
ArtB: I talked to Wendy a bit about this
... Brad is trying to organise a call with the Director
... the sticking point will be normative references
... one of which is to the Fetch spec
... not sure how that will be resolved
... hopefully PR will be published by the end of this month
chaals: next, Clipboard APIs and events
... we don't have Hallvord
<ArtB> ACTION: dimitri reply to Ryosuke's comments re Custom
Element as part of LC comments [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-webapps-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-700 - Reply to ryosuke's comments re
custom element as part of lc comments [on Dimitri Glazkov - due
2013-11-18].
<ArtB> ACTION: barstow start a CfC to publish LCWD of DOM
Parsing and Serialization [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-webapps-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-701 - Start a cfc to publish lcwd of
dom parsing and serialization [on Arthur Barstow - due
2013-11-18].
chaals: it's in work still?
ArtB: on Oct 17 Hallvord sent a status email
... requesting developer feedback
... nearly right to go to LC, still some bugs open
... only Firefox implements the whole spec, some partial
implementations
... an action for Chaals and I to chase those bugs down
chaals: custom elements in in LC
... comments due by 21st
travis: generally do we have any Web Components discussions
planned?
rniwa: we have sent some comments
... for Custom elements about declarative syntax
... we have an issue with the register function taking a
prototype
... there's no guarantee that the prototype is an HTML element
... you could inherit from random HTML elements which also
could be a concern
... I'd like some time to talk about these issues
chaals: we don't have Dmitry here
... next, DOM Parsing & Serialization
travis: I havent' seen any activity in about a year
... maybe we should just consider moving it along to LC/CR and
see if it brings up any feedback?
ArtB: do you want to fix this one bug before LC?
travis: I think it's already fixed in the Living Standard
version
... I just need to do the work
... LC next week maybe?
chaals: CfC for LC next week
paulcotton: to go back to DOM 3, are you having a meeting with
the Indie UI people?
... there's an overlap between the Indie & PF consistuency
... they've asked for an agenda item in HTML on the
relationship between DOM 3, DOM 4 and UI Events
... I wonder if it might make sense to bundle that with the
Indie UI item this afternoon
gary: I don't mind covering that
... I won't be around on Thursday
... so definitely on Monday/Tuesday
chaals: I think it is a 2 min discussion
shepazu: 15-30 mins
... I don't think there's a 2 min discussion. it'll take 5 mins
to get settled in etc.
... there'll be information shared on both sides
ArtB: we have D3E right after Indie UI
... we can go right into that
chaals: we hope it'll fit in to the agenda
... File API we will discuss after the break
... next: Full Screen API
... do we know anything about that?
... no Tantek
ArtB: if anyone is willing to work on the W3C's version of
Anne's Full Screen spec let me or Chaals know about it
... Game Pad, we don't have Scott/Ted in the room
... the WG members know I attempted to get status in advance
for this meeting
... Ted did reply that the spec is being implemented by at
least Gecko
... is there interest from other vendors?
... I know Scott works for Google
... any idea about interest in implementation in Chrome? IE,
WebKit?
... do you WebKit guys have something like the Chrome Status
page?
rniwa: we don't plan to implement Gamepad
... I think there was some suggestion in the past in the WebKit
community, but I don't think we have a plan or a proposal to
ArtB: one reason for having this conversation is about process
... chaals has been working on getting testing/requirements
done earlier in the W3C Process
... I'm just trying to get a sense on this one
... sounds like it might be iffy moving forwards
adrianba: so we've looked at the spec
... it doesn't necessarily map to the way we think about
gamepad
... I know we've thought about how some of the aspects of
gamepad, and the buttons etc., mesh with something like DOM
Events
... so we don't have any plans for this specific API
... it's an area we've been thinking about
... i don't have anything else right now
gary: one comment to add, from the DOM 3 perspective, looking
at the keyboard events
... we assumed some sort of gamepad api would take over for
joystick buttons etc.
shepazu: an earlier draft did consider it
adrianba: I wasn't suggesting for DOM 3, since we want to get
that done
... there's some thinking around multiple users using a common
application,
... and if there's more than one keyboard device provided, you
might want to take presses from different places
... gamepad takes a simpler model
gary: with buttons, we wanted that to happen
... e.g. click events to fire for buttons
... a recent change in DOM 3 click and dblclick events are
fired only for the primary button
... so that doesn't work for gamepad, with a dozen buttons
... that's another area where DOM 3 isn't going to work for
gamepad inputs
chaals: HTML Imports
... Dmitry says the essence might go into HTML
... IndexedDB we'll talk about tomorrow
... IME later today
... Pointer Lock, we're in LC
... if you have a comment on that spec, please make it
... well before the end of this month
... do we know impl status for that?
ArtB: I don't have a link to the latest effort
chaals: progress events we'll come back to
... Push API
... Bryan Sullivan?
bryan: the status is accurate
... Art asked a question on the list
... I don't know that we have anybody specifically signed up to
be a test facilitator
... afaik no tests have been created yet
... afaik Mozilla is still working on an implementation, for
Firefox OS?
... the PAG has done their report
... I think the spec has been pretty stable, for several months
now, no outstanding bugs
... not much traffic on the list
... just trying to get through the PAG phase
... and the PAG report was that the exclusions didn't read upon
the spec
sicking: there's two challenges
... the first is that the first spec we did, that the PAG
looked at, is significantly different from the current draft
... don't know if that's important
chaals: the general principle is, if you change the spec
between FPWD and LCWD, when you CfE again at last call, people
may exclude patents against the new bits of work
... whether that happens or not...
... I think the PAG actually looked at the spec as it is now
<paulc> test
<bryan> scribenick: bryan
<ArtB> Scribe+ Bryan
SSE status
topic for tomorrow
Shadow DOM, working...
chaals: Screen Orientation API, TAG has issues with it...
... URL spec, chaals is editor and no change in 6 months. not a
massive lot ot work to do, but some horrible edge cases.
co-editor welcome. expect help on URLs from IETF
... Web IDL, an hour this afternoon
... Web Manifest, a work of webapps and sysapps. Marcos
indicated there is some research to do. A joint meeting will be
planned.
... Web Storage, at REC. Hixie is making changes to his
version. Any interest in the next version?
... taking an errata approach, we are required to note them but
bothering to do something is another decision
Charter Status
chaals: charter expires in 6 months. proposed changes is to
remove stuff.
artb: no proposed additions at this time.
<jeff_> Doug, can we get a link to the Charter?
<heycam> @@ [continuing on Push API after "I think the PAG
actually looked at the spec as it is now"] ... not the initial
spec
<heycam> bryan: that's correct
<heycam> ... the spec as it stands now is considerably simpler
than it was at FPWD
<heycam> chaals: the assumption is the risk of further
exclusion is reduced
<heycam> sicking: the other challenge is, while we're defining
an API, it's actually undefined how to fire a callback
<heycam> ... the best idea we have is to use service workers
<heycam> ... seems like it's going to be hard to get to Rec
without Service Workers
<heycam> bryan: it also depends on DOM 4
<heycam> ... the events are based on Promises
<heycam> travis: Promises definition is moving to the ES spec
<heycam> ... so might be slightly easier to depend on there
<heycam> shepazu: I think it was accepted into the next draft
of ES6 @@ [end of previous discussion on Push API]
adrianba: can we just ask for an extension?
<ArtB> [23]http://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/Charter
[23] http://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/Charter
<shepazu> [24]http://www.w3.org/2010/webapps/charter/
[24] http://www.w3.org/2010/webapps/charter/
chaals: we may have some work per results from the supergroup
discussion underway in AC
<shepazu> oops, [25]http://www.w3.org/2012/webapps/charter/
[25] http://www.w3.org/2012/webapps/charter/
chaals: any other items we want to fold back in?
... we could request an extension if it will make life easier,
but a proper charter is better and not that hard
shepazu: suggest to push the boundaries re what is allowed in
the charter for a supergroup
chaals: that work started last week and we don't know what will
result. another issue raised was the doc license; should we
follow HTML example, or wait for theirs to complete
... if we push for open doc license earlier its unclear what
would happen - W3C and members need to decide what they would
like on this
jgraham: tomorrow afternoon there will be a session on testing;
with agenda (1) reviewing - this group has a large backlog
... (2) writing tests
jeff: back on the charter; did not see too many deliverable
with dates much beyond today; if we send a charter like that to
the AC we may get pushback on where are the deliverables
... discussion should include what are the deliverables in the
14-15 timeframe
chaals: our pubstatus wiki page gives that info; including this
in the charter is trivial but a first approximation
... we have some guesses in the charter but unsuccessful in
having actuality match the charter
jeff: to provide at least a guess is good
paulc: selectors API Level 1 is in DOM4?
chaals: no
paulc: can someone explain the relationship?
chaals: Selectors Level 1 is REC; we were working on Selectors
Level 2 and since DOM4 is doing that we are assuming it will be
done there
paulc: the pubstatus page says something else
artb: the table has old info
paulc: to Jeff's point, that was confusing
<ArtB> scribenick: bryan
sicking: should be able to move to CR on File API soon, all
issues have been addressed. Implemented in Firefox and (blink,
?webkit, IE
... last minute changes are relatively small so expect that to
be implemented quickly
... sync API is not implemented by more than one
... expect a short CR; no test suite yet, but can contribute FF
test suite
darobin: think there is a test suite, for at least part of it
jgraham: the test suite there is almost all for blob; half of
the spec
chaals: File System APIs...
sicking: that is more controversial; two proposals (google &
mozilla); we have not reached out for other implementers
... same status mostly as last TPAC
... difference in the APIs is mainly in syntax
... the mozilla one is smaller and uses promises
adrianba: one use case we are interested in; being able to pick
a folder or a set of files/folders e.g. for upload - access to
a structure that allows tht
... looking at the google API, the notion of a directory entry
is only missing the interface to a picker for that purpose
sicking: both support the idea, but the syntax for bringing up
the picker is considered out of scope
... input-type = multiple files is supported by both, but the
use case may not be fully supported
adrianba: do you plan to use promises for filesystem as well?
sicking: we should deprecate file reader after implementation,
and add this to the filesystem API using streams tied into
promises
... expect this to be a difficult discussion; once we have
streams it should be trivial to add
kinuko chrome allows apps to recursively select files in
directories; is mozilla interested in that?
scribe: directory enumeration to filesystem:
sicking: the goal is to have the filesystem protocol supported
the same across implementations
<rniwa> ArtB: i think so.
chaals: any input from the room on directions this should go;
what people would like to see implemented
adrianba: seems we want to move this to promises, and expect
revisiting async path APIs; seems difficult to see us
implementing something that does not use the promises pattern
... highest priority is the read-only structure
sicking: an alternative approach not discussed much so far is
to add this to the IndexedDB; the feature set diffs is very
small, mostly around the fileysystem scheme, and inline editing
of files
... a feature that is unclear re implementation is inline
editing of files
chaals: other things is the ability to share files between
apps; using IndexedDB that may be hard; external filesystem
based sharing raises security concerns
... any other plans or uses of filesystem APIs?
<ArtB> Bryan: re Web and TV, need to store large files
<ArtB> … e.g. videos
<ArtB> … one way is file system skin over IDB
<ArtB> … this is an important UC for us
<ArtB> … Want to build a media library
<ArtB> Jonas: have you tried storing large files in IDB?
<ArtB> … think perf will not be good
<ArtB> Daniel: thinks SysApps is doing related work in Phase 2
bryan: we still see the use case coming from web & TV re
performance and scale as a key goal, but have not yet tested it
<ArtB> Arun's spec is
[26]http://w3c.github.io/filesystem-api/Overview.html
[26] http://w3c.github.io/filesystem-api/Overview.html
sicking: the performance is expected to be good even for large
files
Daniel: the media storage API in sysapps is intended to support
the use case for media
(missed question)
IME
<Daniel_Austin> xxx(paypal) = Daniel_Austin
kochi: current status is 3rd WD aug 15
... (showing example onf contenteditable with IME)
... issues with implementation include that the suggestions UI
(system window) conflicts with the UI of the text being edited
... (discussing more changes from latest ED on slide)
travis: we are pleased that the changes have been moved into
the spec; some open questions about the UI overlap issue -
would like to avoid issues for IMEs and google's search
suggestions
<MikeSmith>
[27]https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ime-api/raw-file/tip/proposals/IMEPr
oposal.html
[27] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ime-api/raw-file/tip/proposals/IMEProposal.html
travis: also for handling IME for custom editors, we are
skeptical of the use cases. it's been suggested that we split
that out into a different REC track docs, and get closure on
the rest first
kochi: canvas-based editor may make sense to split out
What are use cases for enableEditingEvents and
disableEditingEvents?
kochi: this spec was drafted in the age of windows desktop -
though the current API seems desktop-oriented, use in mobiles
should address the difference between use of on-screen keyboard
and real keyboard
rniwa: we would like one solution, and not have unique APIs for
different device use cases; this will be hard for developers
otherwise
... also please explain the use case for enable/disable editing
kochi: a single API may be not useful for all platforms
... 2nd question re enable/disable; if some extend capabilities
beyond what contenteditable provides, it gets complicated to
support that with IME
chaals: chair hat off; re the UI blocking issue, it makes sense
that an onscreen keyboard taking the UI space is the same issue
as the IME suggestions blocking concern; two solutions for that
may seem annoying
kochi: we would like to see a unified API to get notice about
blocking events and get window region info
... for devs who want to optimize for desktop vs mobile, we
need ways to customize for different platforms
travis: there are not a lot of standards on how on-screen
keyboards work
... not sure if addressing that falls under IME APIs, but this
sounds like a good space to establish standards
<rniwa> ArtB: thanks for the url!
<rniwa> MikeSmith: thanks for the url!
kochi: for getting to last call, we may split the spec into
UI-related issues, and the editing issues
... we have also had discussion on events; composition events
and locale; beforeinput event and order of events
... for future items; writing tests will start once the API is
complete
... API for providing IME for webapps; it makes sense to split
this out; having an IME for webapps to invoke makes sense;
chrome provides this through a browser extension
sicking: our keyboard API addresses a very different use case;
it does not allow a webapp to build its own IME, rather for an
app to be the IME for other web pages
... there are some APIs on some platforms that allow apps to
act as IMEs, in the web platform we had to build a new API for
that
kochi: so you mean providing IME by the platform and providing
IME for specific webapps is different
chaals: that seams reasonable; the accessibility folks are
concerned about webapps getting this wrong, whereas the system
may do a better job
kochi: we see some use cases e.g. web chat apps that may want
to have their own IME
chaals: for our use cases for russian and english etc, we can
see the power of the webapp IME
kochi: that's all the input for today
rniwa: are you proposing the events issues be addressed in the
DOM events?
travis: we should discuss that in the DOM discussion
chaals: the sense seems to be to separate the parts of the spec
<richardschwerdtfeger> I can't really hear anything either
<abarsto> scribenick: ArtB
<abarsto> Scribe+ ArtB
Joint Meeting with IndieUI WG
<abarsto> ArtB: notes, new people include Jania, Michael
Cooper, RichS (phone), and some others
<abarsto> CN: introduces the Indie UI people
<abarsto> … basic topic is IndieUI spec
<abarsto> … was rewritten last week
<abarsto> Jania: thanks for meeting with us
<abarsto> … we want to share Early in our spec dev
<jcraig>
[28]https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndieUI/raw-file/default/src/indie-u
i-context.html#intro
[28] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndieUI/raw-file/default/src/indie-ui-context.html#intro
<abarsto> … perhaps WebApps will take some of this over at some
point
<abarsto> … User Prefs is one spec
<abarsto> … called "User Context"
<jcraig> From intro: "The specification below adds several new
"Media Features" to detect user settings, using existing syntax
defined in the CSS3 Media Queries specification, and provides
an access control extension to the MediaQueryList interface
defined in the CSSOM View Model. "
<abarsto> … now looking at using Media Queries
<jcraig> "Because this approach relies so heavily on features
that overlap with work maintained by the CSS Working Group and
Web Applications Working Group, it is likely that portions or
all of this specification may move under the purview these
other groups. At a minimum, the IndieUI Working Group requests
guidance and a collaborative working relationship with CSS and
WebApps."
<abarsto> JC: I posted some things into IRC
<abarsto> Scribenick: abarsto
… some overlaps with CSS WG and WebApps
… there is a new privacy model
… limit set of MQ features
… want to customize UX
… for some web sites
… want to use MQ syntax if it fits in
<annevk> jcraig: enums should use hyphens
<annevk> jcraig: or just be words
<annevk> jcraig: e.g. "arraybuffer", not "arrayBuffer"
<jcraig>
[29]https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndieUI/raw-file/default/src/indie-u
i-context.html#example-restricted-call-to-matchmedia
[29] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndieUI/raw-file/default/src/indie-ui-context.html#example-restricted-call-to-matchmedia
JC: <scribe misses pretty much all of what James says; needs
help scribing>
<jcraig> If you're asking me anything, please scribe, b/c I
cannot hear the phone.
JS: we met with CSS WG today
… they will look at our spec and give us feedback
<jcraig> When the author first attempts to check the 'matches'
property of the query, the user agent will determine that this
is a restricted setting, and immediately return false, so the
first call to this function on the initial page load will never
result in audio descriptions being enabled.
Gary: re D3E, wondering about fingerprinting and keyboard
layout
<jcraig> Note: The immediate return is critical to prevent
blocking threads, as well as eliminating potential abuse by
fingerprinting scripts attempting to determine uniqueness using
execution time of the synchronous call to mql.matches.
<jcraig> However, at the same time, the user will be prompted
to decide whether or not to share their media alternative
settings with the requesting web site.
… we need to support customized keyboards
<jcraig> The web author can register for a change listener on
this media query list, and the event handler will be called
asynchronously when the user agrees to share their media
settings.
… need some UX for that
… We should talk with you in the D3E context
CN: not sure this effectively solves the fingerprinting prob
<jcraig> When the user prompted, matchMedia returns false (or
default value) immediately, and only provides the updated match
asynchronously through matchMedia().addEventListener or
subsequent requests to matchMedia().matches (e.g. on page
reload) so there is never any detectable difference between
"No" and "You don't need to know."
… my concern is that you have uninformed and no consent
… forces user to give consent
<jcraig> A restricted @media block never prompts the user
unless both the @media block and an included selector matches.
<jcraig> For example:L
Katie: under privacy laws, have to give consent
… on what can be done with fingerprint info
… otherwise, can get legal suits
CN: not sure international laws re fingerprinting will work
<jcraig> @media (subtitles) { .videoCaptions { display: block;
/* custom rendered captions */ } }
… the tech approach of using MQ for detailed browser sniffing
… MQ can do the job
… Don't think anyone is saying no, don't use that
… but I am skeptical about the privacy story
Ryosuke: agree with Chaals
… can't rely on the laws to save us here
Gary: if we expose this in any way, you won't be satisfied?
<jcraig> When we spoke with CSS, they agreed that some of these
media features made sense, but the privacy/restriction model
may be outside the scope of CSS WG. We think its within the
scope of WebApps…
… not sure it is quite so clear
… is there an impasse here
… not sure where we go with this
CN: not about acceptable or not
… but saying it will protect your privacy is overselling
<jcraig> The other aspect about this that I'd like to bring to
the WG's attention is currently a todo in the draft:
… don't see it as an impasse
… but if the privacy system doesn't protect privacy
<jcraig> Add justification interface on a per-category setting
(possibly meta tag or a partial interface on document).
Justification string may be defined by an new JavaScript
interface, or perhaps by a meta tag in the document head, such
as:
<jcraig> <meta name="userMediaSettings" content="Used to enable
captions and display them in your preferred font size and
color.">
… need to recognize their are implications of providing more
info
<jcraig> Justification string would be included in the user
prompt.
CN: I'm not saying `don't do this`
<jcraig> We think this is broader in scope than just this MQ
proposal.
… but *I* am unconvinced
<annevk> baaaah
<annevk> We already lost the fingerprinting battle
… privacy protection is sufficient
<annevk> With HTTP
<annevk> It's called etag
CN: encourage you to take this to Privacy Interest Group
<jcraig> For example, there is currently no way for a site to
explain to the user, when prompted, why it's requesting
Location data. Map sites are obvious, but others not as much.
AvK: I think we already lost the fingerprinting battle
… don't think we can win this
Travis: but we should try
CN: agree fundamentally the fingerprinting battle is lost
… this could minmize the fingerprinting
… agree with Travis and this approach can help minimize
exposure
… but there will always be some unprotection
Katie: technology is not the way privacy is protected currently
… at some point that may change
<jcraig> WG, do you agree the "justification" string idea may
be useful for Location sharing as well as this idea?
… If some org doesn't do what they said they will do, there can
be
… reprucussions
CN: this could be reasonably protective in some countries
… in some countries there aren't good laws
Gary: if there a bunch of MQs, is there going to be just one
dialog?
… or some choice?
… is that all in scope
JS: I don't think we have worked that out
… but I don't think we want to overburden the user
CN: I would expect that to be an impl detail for the browsers
JC: if there are many MQs, I expect just one dialog
<jcraig> Add justification interface on a per-category setting
(possibly meta tag or a partial interface on document).
Justification string may be defined by an new JavaScript
interface, or perhaps by a meta tag in the document head, such
as:
<jcraig> <meta name="userMediaSettings" content="Used to enable
captions and display them in your preferred font size and
color.">
… take a look at the ToC
<jcraig>
[30]https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndieUI/raw-file/default/src/indie-u
i-context.html#toc
[30] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndieUI/raw-file/default/src/indie-ui-context.html#toc
… there are diff categories
CN: if user changes devices or device state often (e.g. sound
on/off)
… don't want to constrain the browser
… Good impls will decide to make it easy for user
<jcraig> For example, matchMedia('(subtitles)') and
matchMedia('(subtitle-type: cc)') would only prompt the user
once, because the media feature types are related.
… or to provide power control to the user
<jcraig> specifics of prompt will be UA implementation details
… but I don't think the spec should constrain the options
<jcraig> For example, there is currently no way for a site to
explain to the user, when prompted, why it's requesting
Location data. Map sites are obvious, but others not as much.
JC: <something about location data; scribed missed comment>
<jcraig> the "justification" string idea could be used in
Location prompts as well.
Cynthina: IE uses vendor prefix for MQ and high constrast
… setting part of OS
… UA can use that setting
<jcraig> So the site can specify to the user why it wants to
use this information
… simple from authoring perspective
CN: I haven't heard anyone say `no, this approach is not sound`
<jcraig> -ms-high-contrast values are *very* specific to
Microsoft's implementation
JS: summary … go ahead; nuance the privacy story
… tell the story correctly
… go talk to PING
<jcraig> and I think -ms-high-contrast can generalized into
media features for contrast-increased, user-color, and
user-background-color.
Ryosuke: re the requests, different syntax than in DOM spec
… would be good to consolidate the events that are now in diff
specs
CN: re the events stuff, yes, we need serious coordination
Jania: I accept the request to coordinate with the events
… we are hoping to get to LC by EoYear
James: did you mean UIEvents spec or Context spec?
CN: we should have a separate discussion about events
Gary: keyboard layout is another coordination point
… I should be the contact point
<jcraig> Or something else related to "Events", IRC log is
limited and phone call is unintelligible
CN: James, that's Gary you should talk to
DOM 3 Events & UI Events
<annevk> (For the record, it's done here:
[31]http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/ )
[31] http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/
<Daniel_Austin_> lol @abarsto
CN: < a bit of a digression on why D3E is done in one WG and
DOM4 done in a separate group >
Rich: what about the device specific events?
CN: we are about to talk about DOM 3 Events now
<adrianba> ScribeNick: adrianba
D3E and UI Events
gary: we have another LCWD for DOM3 Events
... we think this is really the last one
... we just released a WD a week or two ago
<abarsto> Scribe+ Adrian
gary: expect to have another LCWD in dec or jan
... we have made a bunch of changes we'd like people to review
... so that we have a good LCWD draft
... want to summarise the changes
... not to discuss but so you know where to read if you have
comments
... we took the deprecated stuff and put it into an appendix
... examples don't use deprecated stuff
<abarsto> D3E bugs:
[32]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?component=DOM3%2
0Events&list_id=29721&product=WebAppsWG&resolution=---
[32] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?component=DOM3%20Events&list_id=29721&product=WebAppsWG&resolution=---
gary: for example char went away
... locale got removed from D3E
... currently a BCP47 string which is too general
<annevk> I'm confused. Isn't char implemented?
gary: need to think about this so we move it into UIEvents to
do later
... this is the first version that talks about beforeinput and
input
... we rely on them as a replacement for keypress event
... keypress is deprecated event
... beforeinput is fired, then DOM is updated, then input is
fired
... click and double-click suggested all buttons should fire
click and double-click
... this is only for primary button
... on composition events we spent time on order of firing
events
... composition events relative to input events
... dead keys are handled like small IMEs with composition
events
... earlier versions had special handling for dead key values
... tried to specify event ordering - little more formal than
before
... the last thing is the relationship with DOM 2 Events
... DOM2 had unspecified keycode attribute
... in general DOM3 is an improvement, superset of DOM2
... but it isn't for some key character information
... previously you could tell which physical key was pressed -
cannot do this with key event in DOM3
... code attribute in UI Events will handle this scenario
... if we want DOM3 to be full superset then we should consider
moving code into DOM3
... if people have thoughts on that they should let us know
... i think we should move it in but others want to avoid
delays
... biggest concern is lack of test coverage
... that is an area of focus now
annevk: question about legacy stuff
... do you think you can get it removed from chrome?
gary: which legacy stuff?
annevk: the things you're proposing to remove
<richardschwerdtfeger> I will ask my question here:
gary: you're wondering when we're likely to get rid of keychar
and keycode?
... they will live as long as web sites need them to be around
- we need a good spec to replace them
... don't see them going away soon
... i don't have a timeframe on that
<richardschwerdtfeger> rich: Why is there a MouseEvent
Constructor in UIEvents and not with the MouseEvent in DOM3?
<annevk> garykac: so that seems kinda contrary to how we define
many features
<annevk> garykac: basically, if a user agent needs to implement
in order to be competitive, we should define how it works
gary: i think people were trying to finish DOM3 and other new
stuff went into UI Events
<annevk> garykac: not defining how the web works is bad for
newcomers, and we've had that situation for these events for a
long time
gary: i think we should merge but this would delay DOM3
richardschwerdtfeger: the problem with this is we don't know
what to refer to - is one going to go away
<annevk> (Referring to this as DOM3 is hugely confusing btw. We
should really name both "UI Events".)
chaals: when figuring this out for SVG you don't know which
spec to rely on
gary: we have an appendix telling you the old way and saying
don't do this
<richardschwerdtfeger> Rich: In SVG2 we are trying to know what
to refer to with respect to events as they are defined in two
separate places. What should we reference for mouse events?
gary: but this is a good example of why moving things from UI
Events into D3E would help
... for the constructor I don't think there is a big risk - we
could move them into D3E
<richardschwerdtfeger> Rich: I agree with Adrian
Travis: if we can get things in and stabilise them then that
sounds good
<richardschwerdtfeger> adrian: you stated: but this is a good
example of why moving things from UI Events into D3E would help
<richardschwerdtfeger> Rich: I agreed
chaals: the question was about constructors and code attribute
annevk: that suggestion has been made for ages
<annevk> garykac: name it UI Events too then!
heycam: i think one of the problems with the question which
version do we reference from SVG
<annevk> garykac: backport the name
heycam: it really doesn't matter
<richardschwerdtfeger> Rich: SVG2 is going to last call at the
end of the year. we need something that is clear
heycam: we don't rely on the constructor
... so whichever you care about
... so reference the latest one and consider earlier ones if
you want
chaals: known issue at W3C of having specs out of sync
... sounds like the sensible thing is to look at the modern
spec and use it as your working reference
... if you run into trouble you can consider process hoops for
changing reference
<richardschwerdtfeger> Rich: what is "modern"?
chaals: but now it is more common to publish Rec based on draft
spec if the part you depend on is stable enough
gary: considering UI Events was primary given constructors and
code attribute
... it was a dumping ground for feautures we didn't think would
make it into D3E
... we would only have a couple of small things left
<chaals> [UIEvents is more modern than DOM3, DOM4 is more
modern again, If I got it right...]
<richardschwerdtfeger> Rich: but keyboard events is now fully
specified in UI events separate from the DOM3 spec.
chaals: questions on D3E or UI Events?
Quota API
kinuko: quota api status
... just published new WD beginning of this month
... API is still very small
... two apis - query current usage status and to request new
quota for application
... in the new draft they are both promises
... previously callback based
... also added quota storage change events
<garykac> richardschwerdtfeger: keyboard events are not fully
specified in UI Events. Only the additional KeyboardEvent info
live there at the moment.
kinuko: so apps can watch how usage is increased
<myakura> [33]http://www.w3.org/TR/quota-api/
[33] http://www.w3.org/TR/quota-api/
<scribe> ... new draft has changes that lose compat from old
version
<richardschwerdtfeger> We need to reference the actual event
interface definition
UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: we wanted to make it work better with other
promise based apis
... including imagined ones like service worker
<garykac> Once we move |code| into DOM3, then DOM3 will have a
complete KeyboardEvent specification
UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: previous api was only implemented by chrome -
would like to get more support from other browser vendors on
new version
... think this api is very important for mobile web apps using
local storage
<richardschwerdtfeger>
[34]http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Events/#events-keyboardeve
nts and
[35]https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/d4e/raw-file/tip/source_respec.htm#k
eyboard-event-interface
[34] http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Events/#events-keyboardevents
[35] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/d4e/raw-file/tip/source_respec.htm#keyboard-event-interface
<richardschwerdtfeger> so it is defined in two different places
UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: for web apps and user to agree on how much
data can be stored on local device
... should be addressed in unified way not in each storage api
... would appreciate comments
chaals: obvious question is to implementors
sicking: mozilla are very interested in implementing this -
doesn't mean we are fully happy with api
... looks great so far but need the person actually
implementing to review
<richardschwerdtfeger> rich: which this?
chaals: does that mean you have someone on this?
sicking: not yet
chaals: no current plans or comments from others?
... probably two implementations at some point
... sounds like we will get comments and presumably the spec
will move forward
Travis: haven't looked at the spec in detail
... most browsers will have a quota management experience, not
sure about the API, i know in IE the browser will prompt me
annevk: one comment on the IDL - it uses array that is going
away
... seems like some of this will need to change - not sure how
... what travis said sort of makes sense - pretty hard to ask
the user about amount of space
... platforms we compete with don't do this
... seems like we should strive for this if we want to compete
with native platforms
... for example heuristics about how often the app or site is
used
chaals: Flash apps annoy me because they ask me to allocate
memory all the time
... agree with anne that the implementation is going to be
combination of talking to the user and doing things for the
user
... overspecifying is probably not going to be helpful but
being able to request more memory for an app seems like an okay
thing to do
... basic idea seems okay
... perhaps browser can grant request without the user
... [some examples given]
... does seem like makes sense and important to compete with
other platforms
kinuko: this API defines two types of storage
... temporary and persistent
... temp can probably be used without prompt but could be
deleted
... slightly different experience to native apps
... for web apps people might visit site and then never return
... browsers need a way to know to delete data if they want
sicking: to answer a couple of questions
... our goal is to prompt users as little as possible for
current apis
... we have temporary storage and because we're doing apps
thing
... for apps installed or bookmarked or whatever we can provide
persistent storage
... blown away when user uninstalls
... what travis said about prompting is what we did in firefox
so far
... devs don't have to worry but bad that many developers want
to manage when prompts come up
... they want to forewarn users to let them know why they get a
prompt
... have thought about ability to put quota manager in
automatic mode
... whether that should be default behaviour i don't know
... that's not in draft - only thing i think might be missing
... being able to say that persistent storage doesn't deny when
hitting quota then the browser just prompts
... adds complexity for implementation
kinuko: we thought about this and tried to implement but
suspending execution of storage api while showing prompts
tended to make things very complicated
... also cannot predict when prompts will be shown
... we share same experience but this is why we excluded this
option
... if we did this in an automatic way do you mean we wouldn't
need api?
sicking: this would be an additional piece of the api
chaals: this would be an addition to make browser keep
prompting when anyone else would be denied
... worth thinking about but can see issues in practice
sicking: that behaviour is in gecko right now
... was default behaviour in indexed db
... we would keep prompting - eventually if you keep saying yes
then we give you whatever you want
... developers were not in control of when prompts happen which
was bad
chaals: not sure how bad it was
... not in control of when you run out of memory
kinuko: spec doesn't explicitly say when to show prompt
... in chrome we don't show every time
... might be session based
... not sure if it should be more specifically speced - left to
implementations
<Zakim> annevk, you wanted to ask what's the story for Chrome
OS?
annevk: could imagine model where every web page gets 100MB of
temp space
... browser might drop this
... if you bookmark something then you get persistent storage
... site might advocate to the user to bookmark to make it part
of the user's ecosystem
... seems hard to prompt user for 100MB -what does this mean?
... how did you solve this in chrome os?
kinuko: we don't really solve the problem - we have two types
of apps
... installed and linked
<slightlyoff> abarsto: I have no slides. was informed I'd be
leading this only this morning
kinuko: app can say it wants storage and is prompted during
installation
... we build many important apps as installed packaged apps
sicking: we do similar in firefox os
<slightlyoff> abarsto: but if you have the projector, might be
useful to have this document up on screen:
[36]https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/blob/master/ex
plainer.md
[36] https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/blob/master/explainer.md
chaals: there are some apps that i want to store lots of data
even though i only use them every 6 months
... not sure how to solve that automatically or by asking users
questions they understand
... we are expecting sysapps in 5 mins - suggest 5 min break
... let's have a break
<abarsto> … that's a *5* min break!
<Travis> scripe: Travis
<Travis> scribeNick: Travis
ServiceWorkers
Alex: Will provide brief explainer of Service Workers
... attempt to provide background scripting to manage stuff
that is hard to capture/handle.
... offline bootstrapping is hard--Service Workers can address
this concern
... they are like shared workers, but lifetime is versioned.
... like background extensions in Chrome
... general idea is core of the system is to register a script
that can run with a url pattern
... handle events in an async way.
... no synchronous APIs (unlike shared workers)
... status-- happening in github
... intent is to bring the work to Web Apps WG
... since webapps wanted to handle the offline use case,
service workers should be a good fit.
... Chrome is prototyping to see if it's suitable
Ryu: what are the use cases?
Alex: primary use case is offline problem
... didn't scale well
... appcache didn't quite work for all the scnearios that apps
needed.
... had to either use IDB or local storage, but these aren't
well suited for URL management and fetching.
... you want to have hierarchy or list of caches to
independently manage.
... other use cases: alarms API, push notifications, data sync
in background (less fleshed out)
... there was a name change, but not so far along on the
details of those use cases
shepazu: Does it persist from navigation to navigation?
... one use case may go beyond offline, and provide animations,
or persistent audio?
... have you thought about using it like a proxy between page
loads?
Alex: no visual component (just background execution context)
... it can coordinate between pages, etc.
... to smoothly move from online -> offline world, you need to
bootstrap the service worker.
... first need to install the service worker.
... after that you get the next doc installed under the service
worker.
... there will just be one instance of the service worker (not
multiple)
shepazu: CSS resources? How would it work with it?
Alex: not sure.
... CSS is local to a single running doc.
... but without rendering, not sure how it would integrate.
adrianba: If the app is listening for fetching... does this
have perf implications on network requests?
Alex: Still trying to get data on this.
... the async nature makes this feel a lot like Node.js
authoring.
... fetch event can only respond with promises.
... a storm of requests will block based on the service worker
being a single thread.
Daniel (ebay): What are the security implications, threats, and
countermeasures you are planning?
Alex: Jonas has helped look into the security issues.
... biggest impacting problem is...
<inserted> scribe: Travis_
Alex: We welcome any review.
Daniel (ebay): what is the physically security of a
local-stored service worker?
Alex: Service worker is backed by HTTP cache-like thing. Code
itself is stored as per browser's code storage permission
model.
<annevk> HTTP cache is dead, long live HTTP cache /cc mnot
Alex: should be comperable to the browser's local security
model. Not sure there's more security layers to add on top of
that.
... It's a cache-wide problem, not just for service-worker
chaals: When a CSS page refers to other pages @import.
... how are these managed?
Alex: Initial service worker kicks in.
... initial CSS goes to the service worker...
... sub-downloads hit the sevice worker serially as they come
in.
... like the service worker is a virutal networking layer. It
sees the fully-formed request.
Bryan: Says you can defer loading.
... Tell me more?
Alex: The service worker will see all requests once it's set
up.
... non-http requests are not speced to be handled.
chaals: not data:
bryan: <clarifying behavoir>
... does it interact with XHR?
Alex: yes
... think about this like Mod.Proxy for the browser.
<annevk> Come on, someone ask something tricky
<annevk> Like how this works with sync XHR
<annevk> (it doesn't)
Alex: XHR requests eventually filter through to service worker
<slightlyoff> annevk: wait, I thought you said "hard"
bryan: For offline: you should be able to package server code
in the client
Alex: yes, but the patterns for app construction in flux.
... today we think of server requests first, but with service
workers, alternative scenarios are enabled.
... we're not defining the cannonical way of doing offline.
plh: Is there a use case for the web app to know what is
offline?
Alex: yes, it's specifically designed into the system.
... so that when you're offline, you can have a pre-populated
set of data (part of the installation model)
Mark: Service worker will not go to the browser's cache?
... you could create your own cache?
Alex: If you hit the network, you still go through the normal
network, including the http cache
... it's only a detail that service worker updates themselves
work around this.
... otherwise, its the burden/logic of the service worker to
handle any other case like fallback to missing live info.
Mark: there is lots of flexibility. Coolness.
Richt: Sounds like 4 things merged into one.
... seems like you've invented http primitives.
... could we use that outside of service workers?
Alex: goal is to enable offline and than abstract it out.
... we're trying to make sure we're aligned with Anne's Fetch
algorithm.
... so we may also be able to expose caches objects... but
these are secondary goals.
... primarily it needs to solve the main use case, first.
heycam`: How does the service worker determine to fallback to
the network?
Alex: Service worker can't include XHR (because of it's
sync-option)
... the service worker allows you to connect requests with
responses arbitrarily.
heycam`: Are you forced to use fetch, or can you do something
else?
Alex: just ignore the request.
<slightlyoff> Travis_: yeah, explicitly, don't call
e.respondWith()
heycam`: Seems like many new scenarios come out of this...
Alex: yes.
Jonas: Allows a lot of combinations of scenarios. You don't
have to respone 1:1 with each request now.
... can do server-side templating.
MikeSmith: Notices we don't have a spec???!!!!
<annevk> slightlyoff: so what is the idea for sync XHR again?
MikeSmith: Expected a WebIDL????!!!!
<slightlyoff> annevk: sync is only sync from the perspective of
the document
<annevk> oh MikeSmith <3
chaals: Already covered :0)
Alex: I'll get the spec together after we get through the
existing github bugs
<annevk> slightlyoff: I guess, but if the SW messages the
document and awaits a reply, it's dead
mnot: How do you minimize duplication between http-cache and
synthetic caches. Also resource management: do you prompt the
user.
Alex: On duplication. Could be cheap.
... on the storage level, you can have more persistent info
that doesn't get cache-evicted.
... on storage limits, we don't have this solved.
... there's no distinction for some storage technologies for
persistent vs. not (it's all just file-system)
... and other open issues. Working on fleshing these out.
mnot: de-dup in http-caches. This could solve it. I really like
the way this is going. It's coolness.
bryan: Service workers can't use XHR?
... what else can't they use?
Alex: It's limited to much fewer things you think (all sync
stuff is blocked)
avk: why not just remove the sync-bit?
Alex: we could entertain that. We didn't go that direction.
... think about a worker with all sync-stuff removed (with
importScript as the exception)
bryan: So, it can't be used to build offline apps?
Alex: No.
... You can handle request in any way you like, you can
postMessage, you can manage storage locations, etc.
chaals: the app can still use XHR, of course. It's just not in
service worker.
heycam`: Can you stream a response back from the service
worker?
Alex: No answer to that now.
<MikeSmith> audible sigh from slightlyoff
Alex: Seems like we need something like Streams...??
<annevk> Weird to say no to XHR based on a theoretical fetch
API but say this here slightlyoff
Ted: [muted]
... Fetch vs. XHR: XHR is platform for http-requests. Fetch is
the way for how the network requests stuff.
Alex: XHR != fetch
Ted: seems like a terrible approach to have both.
<slightlyoff> yes!
<slightlyoff> was about to say that = )
Jonas: XHR doesn't have a great way to represent requests (not
just response) and stuff for CORS.
paul: How does service worker work "upwords"?
Alex: whichever core capabilities are plumbed into it. For
example other services that could be put into it.
... Alarms, etc., another service layer for the web. For things
that don't need UI.
<scribe> Scribe: Travis_
<scribe> ScribeNick: Travis_
Streams
<abarsto> [37]http://www.w3.org/TR/streams-api/ -> WD published
5-Oct-2013
[37] http://www.w3.org/TR/streams-api/
<Travis> <crickets>
XHR and Progress Events
<jungkees>
[38]https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/xhr/raw-file/tip/xhr-1/Overview.html
[38] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/xhr/raw-file/tip/xhr-1/Overview.html
<inserted> scribe: Travis
jungkees: looking at XHR1
... in spec history section
... some features left out of the living standard...
... fetching data uris and anonymous flag
... some behaviors are not compatible
<jungkees> jungkees.github.io/XMLHttpRequest-test
jungkees: looking at test cases in W3C test repo
... current status of browser implementation
<myakura> [39]http://jungkees.github.io/XMLHttpRequest-test/
[39] http://jungkees.github.io/XMLHttpRequest-test/
jungkees: covers 95%+ of spec
... compat numbers are 50-60%
... now filing bugs with relevant implementations
... path to interop and CR.
... this is our current status.
... we have ~11 issues in bug list.
... only 1/2 are issues we need to solve for L1 XHR spec
... (1 or 2) not 1/2
... One of these 21650:
... xhr has a limitation in responseType==document
... other issues are related to bleeding edge features that can
be handled in next version.
<bryan> quit
Art: are you marking the bugs for v1 and v2?
jungkees: having an issue with the alignment with the fetch
spec.
... need to discuss how to handle referencing the fetch spec in
the W3C spec.
... not sure how to deal with that.
chaals: not a technical issue, just a doc/process spec.
jungkees: we are referencing WHATWG at the moment.
... we should be ready for LC soon.
... during LC we can resolve the issue with
responseType==document and focus on browser interop and bugs.
chaals: what are the implementation plans.
jungkees: some interop differences: one browser fires
"progress" other's don't.
... there are some subtle differences.
abarsto: Are there any tests for v2 (in the list of test from
the w3c site)
?
jungkees: All of the tests are based on the living standard. We
will see which will drop for the v1 spec.
adrianba: On why don't browsers fix these bugs: these are the
set of "interop" issues we talk about for a long time. Do these
interop issues really matter to web compat?
<inserted> scribe: Travis_
<Eliot> Robin: We can identify the best and brightest tests.
Robin: Might be worth looking into library code (jQuery) to
prioritize bugs to fix.
abarsto: Will Robin/James work with jungkees to help get these
tests prepared?
<abarsto> s/help get these tests/prepared/help identify those
tests that are mandatory for CR/
adrianba: To Robin on the question of interop bugs worked
around in jQuery: is the 'we' the working group?
Robin: I think they're likely working around real problems.
... if this delays the spec a little while, then OK.
adrianba: still trying to understand the priority. I think this
is about having a good spec.
... these tests don't need to be fixed at the same rate as
implementations move forward.
... I think we can look at the spec at a high-level and say
that it's "implementable" and not have to hold up CR.
jungkees: The core editors came to the conclusions that the
issues shown in test cases must be resolved because they are a
major part of the Fetch behavior.
... without resolving this, XHR authors may have to work around
bugs.
chaals: there are different authors for the spec.
... implementers are one categories. Authors want to look at
the spec and write to that.
... may be nice to have the spec speak to the reliability of
certain features in the spec.
<annevk> o_O
<annevk> (need bigger O)
chaals: it's nice to have the next version coming so that we
can look forward to it's more specific requirements.
paul: I think robin is saying that web devs have seen issues,
and that we can use libraries to find what the pain points are.
<hober> annevk: ｏ_Ｏ
Daniel (ebay): Since XHR came out, it's not just browser user
agents, but having a reliable spec is good.
jgraham: post re-writing the spec to be more vague is a really
bad idea.
<annevk> hober: nice
<annevk> darobin: could just remove the conformance section
<annevk> darobin: would also make it shorter
<hober> annevk darobin: we could start using other RFC 2119
terms like "UAs MIGHT AS WELL ..."
<annevk> hober: MUST GO TO REC SO YOU MAY IMPLEMENT
<darobin> hober: I think you mean RFC 6919
[40]https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6919.txt
[40] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6919.txt
jgraham: The right way of solving the problem is to use a test
suite to show authors how reliable and interoperable is the
spec.
... I don't think the right solution is to change the spec.
adrianba: I agree.
<Daniel_Austin> RFC 6919
<annevk> "MUST (BUT WE KNOW YOU WON'T)" hahaha, forgot about
that RFC
adrianba: it seems odd to update the spec according to where
implementations are at some moment in time.
... via MUST to SHOULD update.
chaals: well, we shouldn't change must to should just to squeak
out of a process requirements.
<annevk> abarsto: but it's his favorite proposal
<annevk> abarsto: he makes it at least once a year
chaals: going from test->spec can be challenging.
jgraham: historically we've done a poor job of having a test
suite.
... we need to work on test suite results and how we present
them.
... as implementation run the tests we can gather the data more
reliably.
adrianba: we have some places where we want to correlate this
data, like in Web Platform Docs.
chaals: my basic goal is to get what is needed now, and not
wait while we develop our test suites and tools.
jungkees: Initial intention was to exclude features not running
well across the board.
... our findings uncovered that some things are running fine in
2 of the browsers.
... the core editors found that these are the pimitives of the
fetching of resources.
... we want to keep going with current set of features.
chaals: What happens now? LC and long wait?
jungkees: and working on test suites until CR exit. Want to
start LC now.
... we don't see too many issues in the spec itself, but want
to focus on solving implementation gaps.
... perhaps Q2 of next year we can review the bugs to see how
browser interop is improving.
... interop will improve, libraries will be easier to maintain,
etc.
... that's our current viewpoint.
paulc: Q on original stats: only 50% of the results give
consistent results... at least 2 browsers pass each of them?
chaals: what is the intersection for at least two
implementations?
israelh: how do we prioritize? Put my high priority tests
together, then the bugs that don't impact most sites, this
could work.
chaals: We could take the spec to the director and show that
there are some places with dragons, so beware, but we need
better coverage than we have now.
jungkees: Given major implementations, pass ratio is much
higher (than 50%).
... we've tested three major tests: blink, gecko, trident.
paulc: my personal opinion: we'll never get a spec published if
we expect 100% interop.
... if this spec is to goto CR, what is the exit criteria.
... the WG needs to define what it believes is necessary.
<Daniel_Austin> +1 to Paul's comments
<jungkees>
[41]http://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/Interop/ProgressEvents
[41] http://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/Interop/ProgressEvents
chaals: how much progress are we making on progress events?
jungkees: Looking at progress events test results.
... waiting on bug fixes for Blink to improve the test results.
... if we do have concensus, we need to try to get it on the
list.
<abarsto> ACTION: barstow start CfC to publish PR of Progress
Events [recorded in
[42]http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-webapps-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-702 - Start cfc to publish pr of
progress events [on Arthur Barstow - due 2013-11-18].
jungkees: We _could_ add more examples to the spec from other
use-cases.
... if not required I'd prefer not to.
<abarsto> ACTION: barstow work with AvK and Jungkee re the
Attribution of the Progress Events spec [recorded in
[43]http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-webapps-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-703 - Work with avk and jungkee re
the attribution of the progress events spec [on Arthur Barstow
- due 2013-11-18].
WebIDL
heycam`: Test suite progress?
scribe: I started working on tests for webidl v1. These have
been reviewed.
... I now need to revise tests that have issues.
... I thought I did a fairly complete job, but it would be good
to hear from the people who did the reviews.
abarsto: 5 reviewers did 20%.
... what are we going to consider implementations?
plh: I recall two levels of implementations--first to find
implementations (in other specs) of each feature, and 2nd to
build up the test suite.
heycam`: The tests use features that are available in other
specs.
jonas: two things I know that are programmatic.
... arrays - people wonder what this means.
heycam`: generally, people are not happy with array-ness.
scribe: one test used messageport arrayness, but managed to
convince hixie to change it.
jonas: my proposal was to just use JS arrays or frozen arrays.
... nodelist and other live-lists may just stay as
host-objects.
... we shouldn't add more ways of replicating those behaviors.
... otherwise, we should just use iterable objects (ES6 syntax)
<annevk> NodeList can still be an iterable
heycam`: to defend [] syntax: to handle nodelist-like objects.
scribe: if we don't like that concept, than it doesn't make
sense to allow/expose it.
heycam`: There's still a bunch of new things to align with ES6
features (iterables, proper classes)
<annevk> For NodeList we can add @@iterator from ES6
heycam`: At the Mozilla summit a few things were discussed:
JS-IDL, what's left to finish.
scribe: for JSIDL - I don't really have the time to re-write
for that.
... better use of my time to find/fix the major problems wrong
with WebIDL.
... seven items were discussed
... 1 - typearray, promises, etc., stuff that moves in ES6
... 2 - no custom exception objects; building it in.
... 3 - proper ES classes, maybe replace interface with class
... 4 - deprecating indexed and named properties and stuff that
required proxies.
... 5 - fixing array-ness
... and other stuff.
... with some new focus time, I can get after these.
chaals: done by Christmas.
... ?
heycam`: Any other high-priority items to finish?
jonas: can we get rid of overloading?
... with union types why do we need it?
... other than drawImage?
Alex: WebGL?
heycam`: overloading is the most complex part of the spec. It
would be nice to remove it...
abarsto: heycam` can you draft up a message on what's next?
heycam`: need to update the list of "what's new" to aggregate
into the history of the spec.
<adrianba> WebSocket API uses overloading for send()
scribe: Do we want to hold up v1 of the spec on some of the
larger issues?
Travis: I don't want to implement stuff that's going to change.
heycam`: If you stick to the spec + bugs + list of things I
mentioned, you should be safe.
<chaals> scribeNick: chaals
Scribe+ chaals
Readonly/ writeable interfaces
DS: We have interfaces for SVG / CSS DOM - there is readonly
and writeable versions.
… readonly has no setters, attributes are readonly. Writeable
have setters, and attributes are not readonly
DS: Can't do that in WebIDL. Had a short discussion on the
issue. 2 possibilities; inherited structure, or have 2
interfaces.
… for nihersited structure, the writeable version would inherit
from the readonly version.
Travis: Do you need the interfaceto swap between
readonly/writeable, or is a given object always going to be one
or the other?
… We had objects that changes in IE
DS: The interface doesn't change between readonly / writeable.
<krit> [44]http://dev.w3.org/fxtf/geometry/#DOMRect
[44] http://dev.w3.org/fxtf/geometry/#DOMRect
JG: Readonly is not user-modifiable, but the values may be
changed?
DS: Correct.
... DOMRect is writeable, DOMrectReadonly isn't, so writeable
inherits from it.
… which means that things inherited do weird stuff @@
… solution could be to rename rDOMRectReadonly so people don't
think it is always readonly.
… other solution is use typedef and different interfaces and
specify if you have a readonly or writeable version
Cam: renaming sounds sensible, compared to duplicating
interfaces
JG: View has another meaning - arrayBufferView is writeable.
…bad choice of colours
DS: The iidea of calling it that was so people wouldn't get bad
ideas.
JG: but confusing is bad.
DS: Right. Whey we are discussing.
AvK: Instanceof doesn't work with cross-@@ and isn't good
practice accoring to JS spec editor.
Dino: It's all good.
Travis: Can you give some use cases for DOMRect for context?
DS: SVG DOM is a bit complicated.
<myakura> MikeSmith, there was nobody in the room who could
talk about current state of Stream proposals. so we moved on to
XHR/PE
<krit> <rect>
<krit> var e
… you have different attributes. a rect in SVG is one element,
you can test its attributes.
<krit> e.x
… e.g. the x property.
<krit> e.x.animVal baseVal
… these are different kinds of objects. BaseVal stay set,
animVal includes current value under current animation.
… other examples in CSS Object model
Cam: Also clientRect….
… maybe not a great example, could return a plain object.
DS: Think that was the use case I was thinking of.
Cam: Want to avoid a proliferation of rectangle objects. We
have SVG rectangles, clientRect, and maybe more APIs that want
rectangles.
… would be goo to have a single (or dual) rectangle interface.
Travis: How does SVG do it today?
Cam: With a single interface and a flag to say if it is
readonly or not.
… it's writeable in the intereface and setting it when the
reaonly flag is set will throw.
Travis: Saying readonly is to say when you never want to allow
writing to something. Think in this case it would be OK to have
2 rectangles (which is better than dozens) - one readonly, one
writeable.
JG: Sort of what I was going to ask. Where you have
DOMRectAbstract and the 2 types of rectangle inherit from it
but you never pass one directly.
… Not hugely pretty, but would allow people to check @@@
DS: Would not share anything with the inherited classes. Also,
there are multiple interfaces like this in SVG.
… that are currently incompatible with WebIDL.
Cam: Not that you cannot express this in the SVG spec, can add
process. But people don't love it.
DS: People objected and said it is not possible… but is
implementable.
Cam: Thinks what they said was it is impossible to have a base
class with getter/setter, and a derived class that has the
getter and no setter.
JS: Trying to do that in JS, it isn't possible - this is a
limitation of javascript. So the base has to have a getter and
the derived class a getter/settter.
DS: So we need to define a getter separately for the defined
class?
JS: 2 qusestions. What do we write in WebIDL, what can you do
in Javascript?
… in JS you need a property on the derived intereface with a
getter and a setter
Cam: Not a huge burden. But WebIDL has a features where you an
avoid having the extra getter.
DS: So, should we continue with the inherited part?
… and whatcolour should we paint it?
… not "readonly", "not View"...
Let's not name it now.
JS: If inherit describes a property re-using the getter from
the base class it sounds like a feature created to solve this
problem, and seemingly it does.
… so yes. Use it.
Cam: Thought the question is whether to have a heirarchy of
DOMRect, not just for getters specifically.
... Seems sensible
AvK: Is clientRect live?
[no]
AvK: So they seem two different things. If one is live and
another not, they are not so related.
DS: The ability to make something live doesn't force it to be
live, so I don't think there is a real difference.
AvK: For static object you don't need to use getters, because
you're not returning internal state. That would be much more
sane.
DS: DOMRect only has values...@@@@
<slightlyoff> annevk: just "property"
AvK: You can define objects in two ways - getter/setter or
(not)
… That alternative might be better.
<annevk> slightlyoff: k
Travis: Starting to sound like arrayness problems for WebIDL -
arrays that are sometimes static, or maybe not...
<annevk> slightlyoff: so how do you distinguish that from a
getter/setter property?
… if we were ok doing that in WebIDL for arrays, seems OK to
have an object that has a flag to describe if it is readonly or
not?
… if it works...
Cam: But we want to get rid of arrays with internal flags too.
Travis: Agree, but for the SVG stuff, I don't think there is a
problem except that we want to consolidate everything of the
same kinds.
Cam: Think we do.
DS: I have no problem with it, but there were objections from
e.g. Webapps
JS: Wasthere objection to a subclass that is writeable?
DS: No
JS: So we could move forward on that
Travis: WfM
AvK: If we don't need getters, we should avoid using them.
… have a data property instead.
DS: Don't have dictionaries
AvK: Doesn't matter
Cam: That would be the WebIDL way to do this.
… If we make a @@@@@ for an unchanging object, you can use the
dictionary version to get.
… We don't want to have a new version changing values all the
time.
Alex: By default WebIDL uses getters/setters, whereas
javascript uses properties. Seems Anne was saying start with
the obvious thing from javascript.
… not clear that the base class and then setting a flag to
force readonly, is a good way. Not natural in Javascript.
… Concerned that there is a performance argument I would like
to understand
Trav: Getter argument is that the platform should not update a
data value from underneath the JS code. If the value of a
property is 5, it shouldn't change to 6 without you knowing.
… for that you have tohave an accessor. DOM attributes are that
way, but makes sense that the workd is oriented to
getters/setters.
<Daniel_Austin> +1 readonly descends from readable/writeable
AR: But the single point of truth being something behind the
object seems like a broken assumption
JS: Problem is talking about a wide range of objects - lots of
different behaviours.
… many objects returning would not make sense with data
properties.
… seems in many cases but not all getters make sense. Maybe not
as often as we use them.
… Exception objects are one of the few objects with properties,
and had getters. That'sthe pattern, but people don't use them
much.
… If we can return dictionary objects, inertia is why we keep
using interfaces everywhere.
Cam: With objects, you use a different construct to get data
properties instead of accessors. You can't have a data property
without devolving to prose.
… Makes sense to use a data property...
Alex: What's behind the curtain. If there is an IDL that claims
to say what there is in JS, that doesn't seem to hold. But if
there is a value where JS isn't privy to it, that would not be
a fair assumption.
Cam: If functions that implement getters/setters have access to
other properties...
Alex: What are they?
Cam, Alex: @@@
[scribe missed this]
Ryo: You can do something as if ther is a private state and
getters/setters use that.
… so they aren't all that rettible. So there are elements where
it makes sense.
Alex: Sure. But to implement a class for this I would only have
getters/setters as an exceptional process.
… would support @@@@@@@
<slightlyoff> ...adding properties to itnerfaces in WebIDL
Cam: For these objects, data properties are more liekly to make
sense that things in the DOM that need to do computation or
return non-simple values.
… depends on the APIs you are talking about which makes more
sense.
[should we keep going...?]
JS: Seems like if we are going with getters and setters,
inheritance is the way to go, but think we're not looking
closely enough at using data properties instead.
… Don't know for the specific case of Rectangles.
Cam: Think the proposal was to have both the dictionary and the
data properties.
[scribe may have recorded that backwards]
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: barstow start a CfC to publish LCWD of DOM
Parsing and Serialization [recorded in
[45]http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-webapps-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: barstow start CfC to publish PR of Progress
Events [recorded in
[46]http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-webapps-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: barstow work with AvK and Jungkee re the
Attribution of the Progress Events spec [recorded in
[47]http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-webapps-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: dimitri reply to Ryosuke's comments re Custom
Element as part of LC comments [recorded in
[48]http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-webapps-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2013 09:11:40 UTC