- From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 10:01:33 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-tag@w3.org
Available at
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/06/27-minutes.html
and below in text version:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
Technical Architecture Group Teleconference
27 Jun 2013
[2]Agenda
[2] http://www.w3.org/wiki/TAG/Planning/2013-06-27-TC
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-irc
Attendees
Present
dka, plinss, +1.415.997.aabb, Yves, slightlyoff, ht,
[IPcaller], marcos
Regrets
wycats
Chair
Peter and Dan
Scribe
Yves
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]approval of minutes
2. [6]agenda planning
3. [7]moving to github
4. [8]status of the elections
5. [9]TAG Home page
6. [10]extensible web manifesto
7. [11]AWWW 2nd Edition
8. [12]RICG recommendation
9. [13]TC39 invitation to TPAC (muffins)
* [14]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________
waiting for other participants to join
<wycats_> Regrets I am on an airplane
<slightlyoff> I worry that we're losing momentum = (
<scribe> Agenda:
[15]http://www.w3.org/wiki/TAG/Planning/2013-06-27-TC
[15] http://www.w3.org/wiki/TAG/Planning/2013-06-27-TC
approval of minutes
<ht> I linked the minutes from the wiki and homepages
dka: did people look at the minutes?
... could have some more link to different materials, but looks
ok to me
<dka> [16]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/05/29-agenda.html
[16] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/05/29-agenda.html
<slightlyoff> SGTM
agenda planning
dka: we will plan call agenda by putting then in the wiki
there is a new scribe page:
[17]http://www.w3.org/wiki/TAG/Planning/scribe-rota
[17] http://www.w3.org/wiki/TAG/Planning/scribe-rota
<slightlyoff> looks good, thanks for putting that rotation
together
dka: of course, comments welcome
moving to github
plinss: looks good so far
<dka> [18]https://github.com/w3ctag/promises-spec-text
[18] https://github.com/w3ctag/promises-spec-text
please remember to do readme files
<slightlyoff> what's the URL of the blog?
[19]http://www.w3.org/blog/TAG/
[19] http://www.w3.org/blog/TAG/
yves: the TAG blog is open to all TAG members, and not
restricted to "the voice of the TAG" (unless we decide to)
<slightlyoff> and how does one get access?
dka: we also have the keys of @w3ctag
<slightlyoff> [20]https://www.w3.org/blog/TAG/wp-login.php
[20] https://www.w3.org/blog/TAG/wp-login.php
<slightlyoff> exciting that we have it!
dka: we also have the keys of @w3ctag
status of the elections
dka: we have two candidates running
you can look at their statements
election open until july 16
marcos: should we encourage them to post an extended statement?
dka: see [21]https://www.w3.org/2013/06/17-tag-nominations.html
[21] https://www.w3.org/2013/06/17-tag-nominations.html
<dka> [22]http://chaals.ya.ru/replies.xml?item_no=9
[22] http://chaals.ya.ru/replies.xml?item_no=9
<dka> [23]http://twirl-team.ya.ru/replies.xml?item_no=1036
[23] http://twirl-team.ya.ru/replies.xml?item_no=1036
TAG Home page
plinss: we are working to get the TAG home page redesigned with
some help
plinss: we need it to be modern enough, but the main goal is to
know what we want there.
... there is the style design and information design, we need
to work on both
<slightlyoff> plinss: that sounds good to me, outlining the IA
first
extensible web manifesto
dka: how it impacts what we do?
slightlyoff: it is in the same line with what we did in London
how we are reorganize so that we can track specs to organize
reviews
for APIs
dka: we have actions to reach out to different groups
yves: for WebApps, see
[24]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/PubStatus#API_Specifica
tions to get the list and status of publications
[24] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/PubStatus#API_Specifications
slightlyoff: is there a way to better coordinate spec review?
dka: we can use the irc channel as way to keep in touch
<ht> -1 to IRC -- I'm off- and on-line too often
<slightlyoff> SGTM++
marcos: would like to use this as issues in github
<slightlyoff> ht: are you using irccloud? it's ace
slightlyoff: we need to have a better view of all the groups
that are working on APIs
<marcosc> [25]http://www.w3.org/TR/
[25] http://www.w3.org/TR/
<slightlyoff> marcosc: right, but I don't know how to share or
link to any of the views of that
marcos: the TR page have a list of all specs, nto perfect but
at least you have the whole list
<marcosc> slightlyoff: off, yeah... I know... I was trying to
find that too :(
dka: we don't need to look at everything done at W3C
<Zakim> ht, you wanted to argue for a non-exclusive view of our
scope
<slightlyoff> dka: FWIW, I didn't ask the TAG to spend any time
on workshops
<slightlyoff> one last time; I don't htink this is a TAG item,
I didn't bring it up, and I'd like to put it down = )
<slightlyoff> ACTION: item to dka and slightlyoff to eat, near
each other, soon [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]
[26] http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action01
<trackbot> Error finding 'item'. You can review and register
nicknames at
<[27]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/users>.
[27] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/users%3E.
<dka> Yves: referencing Robin's email - is there a way to have
a better way to state that specs for example are partially
stable and partially experimental...
<dka> Dan: should we make a recommendation?
<dka> Yves: I was thinking - do people in the Tag have opinions
/ experience in this area and if so should we make a
recommendation back?
<dka> Marcos: This is only a big deal on the w3c side. My
recommendation is to keep the current model and allow specs to
proceed down recommendation track so long as referenced specs
remain stable...
<dka> Marcos: could allow sections to be marked for stability.
<dka> Yves: the way you can make assessments of stability of
parts of the specifications could be done by marking it in some
way...
<Zakim> ht, you wanted to point to the QA document about this
<dka> Henry: The problem is that there's so much inertia in
this space. What was just suggested required a change to the
process. W3C process is extremely resistant to change.
<dka> ... it was absorb lots of TAG energy to get the AB to take
this up.
<dka> ... not convinced that the situation we're in is broken
enough to warrant taking that effort on.
<dka> ... reluctant to take this on.
<dka> [discussion of the director overriding process]
<dka> Marcos: It's kind of broken but if someone wants to move
a spec forward it will move forward...
<dka> Yves: one way to work around the issue is to spliit a
spec into small chunks which are linked - and this is a mess
for implementers.
<dka> ... modularity might be a better way to work around that.
<ht> This doc: [28]http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#reference
has a lot of good analysis/recommendations
[28] http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#reference
<ht> We had an action to try to come up with a better story,
which stalled two years ago:
[29]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/303
[29] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/303
<slightlyoff> I don't have an opinon
<slightlyoff> +1
AWWW 2nd Edition
<scribe> ACTION: dka to send an email to the AB telling them
that we are ready to give input on modularization and
references if they work on that topic [recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action02]
[30] http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action02
<trackbot> Created ACTION-820 - Send an email to the AB telling
them that we are ready to give input on modularization and
references if they work on that topic [on Daniel Appelquist -
due 2013-07-04].
<dka> [31]https://github.com/w3ctag/webarch
[31] https://github.com/w3ctag/webarch
ht: worked on a new version of webarch using github
<ht>
[32]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2013Jun/0023.ht
ml
[32] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2013Jun/0023.html
worked on a draft new abstract
ht: there was a bipolar reaction to it, enthusiasm and
anger/hate (scribe paraphrasing a bit)
TBL and I and some other people think the original AWWW
document was not served by some terminology inherited from
rfc2616
ht: at the f2f, we decided we _might_ take it on
ht: we put it on github so that people can edit it and do pull
requests on it
<slightlyoff> ht: that sounds good
<ht> I agree with Marcos that with hindsight it was a mistake
to ask for feedback so soon
marcos: "editing the bible" scares people, we need other ways
to make progress
discussion about private repos and StO
<slightlyoff> to clarify, they only START private
<slightlyoff> and go public once things are "more solid"
<slightlyoff> but this is a much different product -- people
think they already understand it
<slightlyoff> speaking of social pressure....what's next for
API review? bugs in the repo marcos sets up?
<marcosc>
[33]https://github.com/w3ctag/extending-html-responsibly/blob/m
aster/RICG-recs/ricg.md
[33]
https://github.com/w3ctag/extending-html-responsibly/blob/master/RICG-recs/ricg.md
<slightlyoff> that's a good point...wycats_ and I need to do
that this week
RICG recommendation
<slightlyoff> I agree with these
<slightlyoff> +1
<slightlyoff> nice work, marcosc
ht: speaking from somebody outside the community, it would be
helpful to include definitions, or examples (eg: for polyfills)
marcos: there are also prollyfills
TC39 invitation to TPAC (muffins)
<dka> PROPOSED RESOLVED: Marcos to send
[34]https://github.com/w3ctag/extending-html-responsibly/blob/m
aster/RICG-recs/ricg.md to RICG as feedback.
[34]
https://github.com/w3ctag/extending-html-responsibly/blob/master/RICG-recs/ricg.md
<ht> +1
<dka> RESOLUTION: Marcos to send
[35]https://github.com/w3ctag/extending-html-responsibly/blob/m
aster/RICG-recs/ricg.md to RICG as feedback.
[35]
https://github.com/w3ctag/extending-html-responsibly/blob/master/RICG-recs/ricg.md
dka: there is no pb to have TC39 members invited at TPAC
<slightlyoff> I don't know either, but i feel like we should
handle this urgently
<slightlyoff> ht: it's easy...es-discuss is open
<Zakim> ht, you wanted to suggest we should ask TC39!
ht: we should ask TC39
slightlyoff: I don't know what to do, asking TC39 is good but
giving then too many choices might be an issue
<slightlyoff> ht: I like that a lot
<slightlyoff> ht: that's good framing
<dka> Option 1: A hosted meeting at TPAC either Monday-Tusday
or Thursday-Friday if TPAC with understanding that others can
join as guests and you can join others as guests...
ht: difference is being like a regular WG or less constrained
like the TAG
<slightlyoff> can we iterate on this quickly on the mailing
list?
<dka> Option: 2: a less constrained invitation as guests of the
TAG?
<slightlyoff> I'd like to make sure wycats_ has input
<slightlyoff> dka: yes, I think so
<slightlyoff> there's also an internal TC39 reflector that I
can post to
<slightlyoff> but I think public-script-coord is a good way to
start
<slightlyoff> yes, I can
<scribe> ACTION: dka to talk to Jeff about TC39 to TPAC
[recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action03]
[36] http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action03
<trackbot> Created ACTION-821 - Talk to Jeff about TC39 to TPAC
[on Daniel Appelquist - due 2013-07-04].
<scribe> ACTION: slightlyoff to send email to
public-script-coord about TC39 and TPAC [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action04]
[37] http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action04
<trackbot> Created ACTION-822 - Send email to
public-script-coord about TC39 and TPAC [on Alex Russell - due
2013-07-04].
dka: don't hesitate to bring the chairs feedback if we miss
something
next call will be in two weeks: july 11th
ADJOURNED
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: dka to send an email to the AB telling them that
we are ready to give input on modularization and references if
they work on that topic [recorded in
[38]http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: dka to talk to Jeff about TC39 to TPAC [recorded
in
[39]http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: item to dka and slightlyoff to eat, near each
other, soon [recorded in
[40]http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: slightlyoff to send email to public-script-coord
about TC39 and TPAC [recorded in
[41]http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action04]
[38] http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action02
[39] http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action03
[40] http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action01
[41] http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action04
[End of minutes]
--
Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras.
~~Yves
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 14:01:35 UTC