- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 16:44:09 +0100
- To: www-tag@w3.org
online at
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/07/18-minutes.html
and as plain text below
ht
-----------
- DRAFT -
Technical Architecture Group Teleconference
18 Jul 2013
See also: [2]IRC log
Attendees
Present
Dan Appelquist, Marcos Cáceres, Sergei Konstantinov, Yves Lafon,
Peter Linss, Noah Mendelsohn, Alex Russell, Henry S. Thompson,
Anne van Kesteren (IRC only)
Regrets
Tim Berners-Lee, Yehuda Katz, Jeni Tennison
Chair
Dan Appelquist
Scribe
Henry S. Thompson
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]Admin
2. [5]TC39 / TPAC Update and Next Steps
3. [6]Review current work including new work items and spec
reviews
__________________________________________________________________
Admin
DKA: Welcome to new member Sergei Konstantinov (Yandex)
<twirl> Hi, everyone :)
TC39 / TPAC Update and Next Steps
DKA: Update from Philippe le Hegaret on this
<slightlyoff> no discussion in tc39 that I'm aware of
DKA: So the question is how we move the discussion from a private
conversation to engage all of TC39
... to make good on our promise of making TPAC a welcoming place for
TC39
AR: I'll bring this up in person at the TC39 meeting next week
DKA: Before our next call?
AR: Yes
Review current work including new work items and spec reviews
DKA: Round robin?
HST: +1 to round robin
DKA: MC, anything happening?
MC: Not sure, given uncertainty about how my participation will go
forward
PL: I have been working on github mirroring and so on
<slightlyoff> plinss: exciting!
PL: I'll give more info when I'm ready to go public
DKA: Progress on website redesign?
PL: No, will set up a repo and get that out
NM: I mentioned the HTTP2.0 which you might want to look at at some
point
HST: I've spent the last week or so collecting statistics about http
usage in conjunction with http 1.1 review.
HST: About to do a TAG blog post with some numbers.
HST: Highlight is - I think HTTPbis needs to look very carefully at
what it has to say about content negotiation.
HST: I've looked at 100m http requests and only a couple of hundred 300
responses - responses supposed to be given in 'reactive' content
negotiation.
<slightlyoff> ht, can you characterize the services that the requests
are from in the post?
<annevk> (300 is a kind of a useless response code. Nothing happens.)
<slightlyoff> ht, are they from many services? a few?
<slightlyoff> ht, that sort of thing
AR, That's harder, privacy issues mean in most cases I don't have
request info.
<annevk> I don't have anything. I'm been traveling and otherwise
occupied.
AR: I spoke with Chris Wilson about Web Audio, which I've made an
initial stab at writing up
... Plan to work on that with YK and also do a draft review
DKA: I reviewed your Web Audio document, I think it looks good
AR: There's an important architectural issue which isn't addressed in
my document yet: shared mutable data which is viewable from multiple
concurrent javascript thread
... That breaks a core invariant of the JS processing model
... I have a proposal on how to avoid this, but I'm not quite ready to
propose it until I research things more
... I hope they can sidestep the problem via my approach, but it's
going to be tricky
DKA: Timeline?
AR: I'm ready for feedback ASAP on the document as it stands, wrt both
content and format/style -- is this the kind of way we should be
feeding into WGs?
DKA: The variation between formal and informal in the document did
strike me
AR: Put in an issue or pull requests for some changes
DKA: Style isn't the main point
... What else do we have in github in the spec review area. . .
... Any other issues?
... I added the Push API to the spec review list
<slightlyoff> have the chairs thought about a plan for how to work
through the backlog in a structured way?
DKA: I reached out to Charles and Art of Web Apps to try to begin
coordination between us and Web Apps
... Certainly we should plan for joint meeting at TPAC
... We may ask Art to join us in Cambridge at the Sept. F2F
... But we need to move sooner on key topics -- Charles is keen to see
the Promises discussion moving soon
AR: Wrt the [7]Status pages which the W3C maintains, is there a process
we have / should have to monitor that?
<slightlyoff> right, makes sense
AR: I'm happy to work in a "put out fires" informal way, but do we need
more?
DKA: I was expecting to use [8]the spec review list for this
<Yves_> Some groups have a dashboard, like webapps. Otherwise the WG
page and their publication list.
AR: That's fine, but how do we keep confident that we keep up to date
on what's new and might need to go on there
MC: I agree, is ad hoc monitoring sufficient?
... So, recently, a [9]Mediastream Image Capture spec came up, do we
need to put it on the list -- i.e., do we treat all new specs equally?
DKA: We could have a semi-automatic process, where we periodically go
through new specs and vote them in or out
AR: Maybe just auto-generate a bug on the spec review list for new pubs
DKA: Sure -- propose something by email?
AR: Will do
PL: YL did take an action to try to automate this, at the F2F
DKA: But YL is currently blocked on that with hardware pblms
<slightlyoff> oh, right
<slightlyoff> totally forgot about that...sorry Yves_
DKA: Ashok Malhotra has sent email about a draft candidate for a TAG
blog post based on our Publishing and Linking work—once we have a look
at it, I expect we will say yes
PL: We still have a decision to make on whether we have a 90-minute
meeting on a regular basis. . .
<slightlyoff> I thought the proposal was to leave it open
<slightlyoff> not to commit to a longer meeting every 2 weeks
<Noah> I think you should send a signal as to when TAG members should
try to hold > 30 mins free, and when not.
<Noah> My concern is that when you do want a longer call, you'll find
conflicts
DKA: I thought the plan was a) have a 30-minute standup every week, and
to have the possibility of deciding to extend some calls for technical
discussion if we have something queued up
<slightlyoff> +1 to what DKA jsut said
<twirl> +1
<slightlyoff> agree with that
<Yves_> Note that inviting spec editors and not only chairs might be
intetesting
PL: Note the YK has a conflict post 30-mins every other week, so we
need to be aware of that
<dka> Proposed RESOLUTION: have a 30-minute standup every week, and to
have the possibility of deciding to extend some calls for technical
discussion if we have something queued up, taking into account members'
scheduling issues and providing the group adequate notice.
<slightlyoff> +1
<Yves_> +1
DKA: Notice would normally be given by the Monday before
RESOLUTION: Have a 30-minute standup every week, and to have the
possibility of deciding to extend some calls for technical discussion
if we have something queued up, taking into account members' scheduling
issues and providing the group adequate notice (ideally by the Monday
of that week EOD).
PL: Maybe we end each standup with a call for tech. topic for the next
week
HST gives regrets for next 6 weeks :-(
DKA: What about discussing http2.0 next week?
... But HST won't be here -- take it to email?
<slightlyoff> ht can't make next week = (
<slightlyoff> +1
HST: You can talk about it w/o me, but sure, let's start by email
DKA: Adjourned
__________________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [10]scribe.perl version 1.135
([11]CVS log)
$Date: 2013-07-20 15:38:42 $
References
1. http://www.w3.org/
2. http://www.w3.org/2013/07/18-tagmem-irc
3. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/07/18-minutes.html#agenda
4. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/07/18-minutes.html#item01
5. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/07/18-minutes.html#item02
6. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/07/18-minutes.html#item03
7. http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-all
8. https://github.com/w3ctag/spec-reviews
9. http://www.w3.org/TR/image-capture/
10. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
11. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
--
Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Saturday, 20 July 2013 15:44:31 UTC