- From: Cruikshank, David W <david.w.cruikshank@boeing.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 09:51:56 -0700
- To: <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>
The minutes of the teleconference are located at: http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/WG/Minutes/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.h tml [1]W3C [1] http://www.w3.org/ - DRAFT - WebCGM Teleconf 27 Jul 2006 [2]Agenda [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2006Jul/0092.html See also: [3]IRC log [3] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-irc Attendees Present Dieter, Thierry, Chris, Benoit, Dave, Lofton, Stuart Regrets Don (until Aug 7) Chair Lofton Scribe Dave Cruikshank Contents * [4]Topics 1. [5]roll call 11:00am EDT, membership, agenda 2. [6]routine WG business 3. [7]LC comments 4. [8]Implementation, CR, and TS topics 5. [9]Tracker status * [10]Summary of Action Items _________________________________________________________ roll call 11:00am EDT, membership, agenda routine WG business Meeting registration is complete <tmichel> I had lost connectivity. Iam dialing back to Zakim ... <Chris> standards are like sausages - ones enjoyment is increased by not knowing how they are made <lofton> well said! LC comments <BB> Dean, are you still around? Did you get a chance to fix the tracker mailing list (from public to private)? i18n core accepted our response to their three comments <lofton> pemberton: <lofton> [11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2006Jul/0079.ht ml [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2006Jul/0079.html <scribe> ACTION: Lofton to send new draft abstract to WG for approval in response to Pemberton comment [recorded in [12]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.html#action01] [12] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.html#action01 <scribe> ACTION: Lofton to send new draft abstract to WG for approval in response to Pemberton comment [recorded in [13]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.html#action02] [13] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.html#action02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-5 - Send new draft abstract to WG for approval in response to Pemberton comment [on Lofton Henderson - due 2006-08-03]. <trackbot> Created ACTION-6 - Send new draft abstract to WG for approval in response to Pemberton comment [on Lofton Henderson - due 2006-08-03]. Lofton will submit a comment dealing with hightlight method prose Implementation, CR, and TS topics Chris comment on whether applications should demonstrate passing both WebCGM 1,0 and 2,0 TS <lofton> home page for viewers & printers: <lofton> [14]http://www.cgmopen.org/webcgm/viewers.html [14] http://www.cgmopen.org/webcgm/viewers.html For WebCGM 1.0 TS there were Inplementation Conformance Statements from vendors stating conformance to the TS, no matrix like we have for 2.0 TS <Chris> a bunch of these statements date from 2003 - I assume implementations have improved in the interim <Chris> Larson WebView CGM Pro seems to pass a lot of tests, even then Question is what do we do about the 1.0 TS feature subset of 2.0 TS? <BB> to some degree i presume, the comments will give you more specific information, it's worth taking a look at them <Chris> MetaWeb has a lot of passes too One option is to create a composite ICS to see where we may have problems <scribe> ACTION: Lofton to work on a composite ICS [recorded in [15]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.html#action03] [15] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.html#action03 <trackbot> Created ACTION-7 - Work on a composite ICS [on Lofton Henderson - due 2006-08-03]. After we have a composite ICS, we will contact vendors to verify potential problem areas We should continue discussion on principle on the list at: [16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2006Jul/008 4.html [16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2006Jul/0084.html Test suite is under editorial control of the OASIS WebCGM TC According to Thierry, there should be a problem with the TS being someplace other than W3C Chris...the only requiremenet is that the TS is available to anyone and without and associated fees <tmichel> There should not be a problem to have iit else than W3C site, if it is publically available. <tmichel> Will read the minutes to know if we will have the testsuite on W3C site.. <tmichel> Sorry I need to go as I have to join the TTWG telecon starting at 18h00. <tmichel> Bye Need to edit the intro document to be more w3c centric. We will give Thierry and Chris access to the ftp site where we keep the tests we are working on Tracker status Beniot will send off a test issue to see which list it ends up on Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: Lofton to send new draft abstract to WG for approval in response to Pemberton comment [recorded in [17]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.html#action01] [NEW] ACTION: Lofton to send new draft abstract to WG for approval in response to Pemberton comment [recorded in [18]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.html#action02] [NEW] ACTION: Lofton to work on a composite ICS [recorded in [19]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.html#action03] [17] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.html#action01 [18] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.html#action02 [19] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/27-webcgm-minutes.html#action03 [End of minutes] _________________________________________________________ Minutes formatted by David Booth's [20]scribe.perl version 1.127 ([21]CVS log) $Date: 2006/07/28 16:38:47 $ [20] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm [21] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Friday, 28 July 2006 16:52:07 UTC