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

Halloween minutes

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 17:44:44 +0000
Message-ID: <CADnb78gkjxs290kevtJcDsGjT9SkfHA8VmV_q6KMN9Do=eYWoA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "www-tag.w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
HTML: http://www.w3.org/2013/10/31-tagmem-minutes.html

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]JSON
         2. [6]DRM / EME
         3. [7]Securing the Web
         4. [8]Custom elements
         5. [9]Election
         6. [10]Web Animations
         7. [11]HTTPbis
         8. [12]WebRTC codecs
         9. [13]China
     * [14]Summary of Action Items

   <dka> Boo!

JSON

   HT: Wendy will be in Vancouver next week for the IETF meeting.
   Following some initial exploration with her and Philipe she
   will contact the chairs of the IETF JSON WG.

DRM / EME

   <ht> DKA agreed that we would wait to hear from Wendy before
   taking our own response to the JSON WG forward

   DA: Henry, you seem to be suggesting DRM as a work item for the
   TAG.

   HT: I am not competent technically in this area to take this
   forward.
   ... I felt a real lack of technical discussion. I got some of
   that from Henri and other contributors.
   ... I would prefer less ideological discussion.
   ... I am interested in knowing whether Tim would like a Task
   Force.

   DA: If we do that we need to find someone who is sufficiently
   neutral.

   HT: I think we should have a Task Force and find someone who is
   on both sides of the ideological gap.

   DA: I will take that up with Tim in China.

Securing the Web

   DA: We talked about this during the F2F. Every day I see a
   headline that relates to this.
   ... If we want a TAG recommendation here, we should get
   started.
   ... I am going to take the list we have and put it on our
   GitHub.
   ... I will make a start, but I will need people to fill in the
   details.
   ... So the question is, are we all on board with the list? Do
   we want to take this on as a work item?

   <dka>
   [15]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/10/01-minutes.html#item04

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/10/01-minutes.html#item04

   list ^^

   <dka>
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/10/whiteboard-security.jpg

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/10/whiteboard-security.jpg

   <scribe> ACTION: Dan to start on the securing the web document.
   [recorded in
   [17]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/31-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-843 - Start on the securing the web
   document. [on Daniel Appelquist - due 2013-11-07].

Custom elements

   AvK: So the custom elements proposal looks okay. What I wonder
   is what existing browsers are doing for their own elements and
   whether the right hooks are exposed
   ... However, figuring that out is a rather large undertaking
   and I'm not sure whether I have the time
   ... I have been trying to find someone else to do it, but no
   luck so far

Election

   DA: I will issue a call for new TAG members with a security
   background.

   <twirl> +1

   <twirl>
   [18]https://github.com/twirl/spec-reviews/blob/master/2013/10/W
   eb%20Animations.md

     [18] https://github.com/twirl/spec-reviews/blob/master/2013/10/Web%20Animations.md

Web Animations

   SK: I put up a review [see link above] for this specification.
   Please give me feedback!

HTTPbis

   HT: The drafts (HTTP/1.1 revision) have gone in Last Call.
   ... I'm working on producing feedback on content negotiation.

   <ht> text/html 80.9G

   <ht> 2.9

   <ht> 5.40G

   <ht> 6.7

   <ht> text/xml 40.1G

   <ht> 1.5

   <ht> 26.5G

   <ht> 66.1

   <ht> application/xml 14.1G

   <ht> 0.5

   <ht> 60.0M

   <ht> 0.4

WebRTC codecs

   <ht> So, hugely differing hit rates for text/html, text/xml and
   application/xml

   <dka>
   [19]https://brendaneich.com/2013/10/ciscos-h-264-good-news/

     [19] https://brendaneich.com/2013/10/ciscos-h-264-good-news/

   DA: The IETF will make a decision regarding a required baseline
   codec.
   ... VP8 vs H264

   <ht> those lines above read as type total bytes;percent of 2.8T
   bytes total;bytes found in cache; percent bytes found in cache

   DA: One of the issues has been that H264 has no RF status, but
   Cisco has announced they'll release free binaries for which
   they'll pay the royalties.

   <ht> I wonder if video codecs might go the same way -- probably
   not. . .

   AVK: MPEG LA has a cap money-wise so Cisco will pay that.
   Everyone will have to use their implementation without
   modification and it will have to be fetched from their server
   before usage.
   ... My understanding is that it's slightly better than the
   status quo, but far from ideal given that there's a single
   implementation. Innovation is not allowed. Security issues will
   be shared. As Brendan Eich said, hopefully this will make it
   required for new codecs to be at least gratis.

China

   DA: Anne and I want to discuss better developer outreach.
   Everyone welcome to join.

   <dka>
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/10/whiteboard-upcoming.jpg

     [20] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/10/whiteboard-upcoming.jpg

   <dka> On the top of that image

   </adjourned halloween="on">

   <dka> boo!


-- 
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Thursday, 31 October 2013 17:45:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:22 UTC