W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2013

draft June 27th teleconference minutes

From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 10:01:33 -0400 (EDT)
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1307030958150.10943@wnl.j3.bet>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:58 UTC