- 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