See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 01 May 2014
<dka> https://www.w3.org/wiki/TAG/Planning/2014-04-F2F
<dka> Scribe: Domenic
<dka> ScribeNick: Domenic_
dka: if people can take a look and make sure they're happy, i will sent them to the mailing list since I know people care about that.
slightlyoff: talking with Ryan and Domenic about the web crypto discussions that are ongoing
... they have a specific question about the encoding of key values which may or may not be JSON. (They probably are JSON.) Should they be a bag of bytes, or should they be a JS object?
... the encoding spec allows easy conversion between bytes and strings but isn't always supported
... Domenic is also working on other spec issues.
dka: anything on service worker?
slightlyoff: we're working toward FPWD, but trying to use web components as an authoring format has been problematic.
... it's in good shape though and most outstanding issues have been resolved
... there are a few security concerns that are outstanding, about additional restrictions we may choose to add---not core security concerns.
dka: should we bring the security issues to TAG?
slightlyoff: (I missed this)
dherman: have you continued to collaborate with Mozilla people on this?
slightlyoff: yes, although not since the last f2f which resulted in many decisions made that need to get implemented
<dka> STRINT workshop report: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-strint-report-00
<dka> ScribeNick: dka
http2 working group going apace
interiim meeting in NYC 5-6 June...
Domenic: working on web crypto stufff.
… when we do the spec revirews we should get the editors involved as soon as possible…
… another concern: deficiencies in webIDL.
… someone needs to patch WebIDL…
Dan: anywhere on the web?
<Domenic_> https://github.com/w3ctag/jsidl/issues/2
<Domenic_> https://gist.github.com/domenic/bccb9a521a2a6b0e3568
<Domenic_> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-principles/issues/11
<Domenic_> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-principles/issues/10
<Domenic_> dka: what about the promises guide feedback?
<Domenic_> Domenic_: incorporated some of it, still more to do; it's near the top of my priority list
<scribe> ScribeNick: DOmenic_
dherman: I've been dealing with the fallout from the last TC39 meeting, where a new member, Jafar Hussein, had some major pushback on various aspects of the ES6 generator feature.
... this was brought up very late, and I'm the champion of the generators feature, so I've had to scramble to catch up on that.
... the discussion touches on future directions generators could go on, for example asynchronous iteration. However that ends up, it'll likely be a major part of writing JS programs going forward
... and it may be related to async event streams or I/O streams
... so I've been trying to understand various perspectives, including Jafar's, Domenic's, and Irakli Gozala's channels approach...
<dka> HTML imports.
dherman: HTML imports is getting toward the end, but I am trying to make my and Mozilla's concerns known.
dka: when you post your concerns please cross-post to www-tag
dherman: I also discussed with Dmitri and the Servo team about various things like making CSS more extensible, doing archeology on the render tree, asynchronous layout queries, ...
... the least semantically scary of those is making asynchronous layout queries
... (the least likely to be controversial)
<dka> JeniT anything on ACTION-858 (package URLs) you can share?
dherman: the other ideas are really worth exploring. Dmitri brought up the idea of a "render tree summit" with the relevant parties. I want the Servo team to be a central part of those conversations. Patrick Walton is very nervous about these ideas---exposing too much detail could destroy implementation flexibility.
I know that hober also expressed such concerns at the EWS afterparty.
<JeniT> dka: only the discussion on the list; I think we need to decide how to pass that on to a WG
slightlyoff: I think we need to plan to make mistakes and make decisions under uncertainty, instead of being scared to proceed.
dherman: I'm talking about Servo today, not about constricting the future.
<slightlyoff> how many more folks need to give status on this call? we're like 3 of 6, right?
<dka> I think we have sergey and Tim.
dherman: there is some line where the pay-as-you-go argument becomes a dealbreaker for the future, if the cost is too high.
<slightlyoff> +1 to the render-tree summit
dka: I like summits
dherman: one thing that comes out of that could be a requirements document
dka: tim, anything happening with net neutrality?
timbl: lots of things happening! laws are going through the EU...
... while the FCC seems to be sliding backward, otherwise looking up. The battle is raging!
... at the AC meeting, it will possibly be discussed as to whether the consortium should take a purely technical role, or also make policy statements.
dherman: how much should the TAG weigh in on process questions? I've been getting more pessimistic...
dka: I think we do ... but we sometimes rathole...
Domenic_: I thought we were entirely non-policy ... technical only...
dka: yes, but some of these issues bleed over. We can weigh in, even if the AB has final say.
Domenic_: ok. E.g. the quality of references is to some extent an interesting technical issue.
timbl: it isn't the TAG's primary goal to work on the process document, but anyone who's involved in the process can give feedback. We should always be critical of the process and willing to suggest changes.
... we can patch the process very quickly without having to create a new one.
dka: and the TAG does have a role in liaising with other groups, WHATWG or TC39.
twirl: there are two pending tasks, EME and Web Animations. We should proceed with them.
<dka> Pending drafts - EME and web animations - need to be reviewed and decision needs to be made...
<twirl> https://github.com/w3ctag/spec-reviews/pull/27
<twirl> https://gist.github.com/twirl/9483deeb93d134ad2aa8
dka: should we ask the editors of web animations to join us in a future call?
slightlyoff: happy to make connections there
<dka> Adjourned