00:10:59 RRSAgent has joined #waf 00:10:59 logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/04/18-waf-irc 00:11:08 Meeting: WAF WG F2F Brisbane, AU 00:11:16 Date: 18 April 2007 00:11:48 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-appformats/2007Apr/0002.html 00:12:04 RRSAgent, this meeting spans midnight 00:12:05 Lachy has joined #waf 00:13:14 marcsil has joined #waf 00:13:28 Chair: Art 00:13:42 Present: Art, Cam, Guido, Anne, Marcos, Lachlan 00:15:12 sure 00:15:34 marcos has joined #waf 00:15:52 hixie - can you join the W3C bridge? 00:16:20 which code? 00:16:28 9231 00:16:43 Zakim has joined #waf 00:16:52 zakim, this is waf 00:16:52 artb, I see IA_WAF(F2F)8:00PM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be waf". 00:17:07 yeah, whatever, zakim :) 00:18:03 Zakim, what is the number? 00:18:03 I don't understand your question, Hixie. 00:18:08 what's the phone number again? 00:18:14 been so long i can't remember it anymore :-) 00:18:28 +1 617 761 6200 00:18:30 thanks 00:18:50 Zakim, this is waf 00:18:50 ok, Hixie; that matches IA_WAF(F2F)8:00PM 00:19:00 Zakim, who is here? 00:19:00 On the phone I see Ian_Hickson 00:19:01 On IRC I see marcos, marcsil, Lachy, RRSAgent, artb, anne, heycam, schepers, dino, mikko, Hixie, trackbot 00:19:04 Zakim, i am Ian_Hickson 00:19:04 ok, Hixie, I now associate you with Ian_Hickson 00:20:23 +??P1 00:22:40 marcos has joined #waf 00:24:51 Lachy has joined #waf 00:25:35 +??P2 00:26:35 scribe: Marcos 00:26:44 scribnick: marcos 00:26:55 TOPIC: XBL 2 00:27:51 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-appformats/2007Apr/0002.html 00:28:28 Artb: I wanted to go through the three agenda items regarding to XBL 00:29:33 anne has joined #waf 00:34:25 heycam has joined #waf 00:34:47 marcsil has joined #waf 00:37:04 artb has joined #waf 00:37:07 anne2 has joined #waf 00:37:58 marcos has joined #waf 00:38:16 Artb: I remember Jonas had made some comments about XBL. 00:38:19 Hixie: We havent recieved many comments yet, I would like to wait for more implementation experience and comments to come in and 00:38:20 then address them all at once. 00:38:22 Artb: Based on the comments, Will we have to go back to last call? 00:38:23 Hixie: we might have to go back to last call. 00:38:25 Artb: It sounds reasonable that we might have to go back to last call to address the comments. 00:38:27 Cam: it might be nice to start addressing some of the emails now. 00:38:30 Artb: what are your thoughts on going ahead and start responding to Jonas' comments, it might be good to keep the public list 00:38:32 up-to-date. 00:38:34 Arb: where there any other comments apart from Jonas? 00:38:35 hixie: there were a 00:38:37 few comments from Anne, etc, but few other significant ones.. Jonas seems to be the only mayor person. 00:39:49 Artb: I'd like to get a general idea about how we are going to do the test suite 00:40:39 Hixie: I have 3 suggestions. It would be very helpful if the test suite followed the guidelines simply say if you have passed or failed within one second. 00:41:01 http://hixie.ch/tests/evil/css/css21/guidelines/ 00:41:08 CSS guidelines for test suites 00:41:20 s/guidelines/CSS WG's guidelines/ 00:41:26 http://cgi.w3.org/member-bin/process.cgi?method=url&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hixie.ch%2Ftests%2Fevil%2Fcss%2Fcss21%2Fguidelines%2Fguidelines.src&output=html 00:43:14 Hixie: those guidelines are quite useful. Hopefully we will get a large number of tests. The best way of getting lots of test is to open them up to the public. We are going to get lots of tests, so it's going to be hard to check them all so we might assume that they are valid until they are found to be otherwise by implementers. 00:43:51 Artb: does anyone have any test suite experience they would like to share? 00:46:15 Artb: regarding getting contributions from public, we need to find out if there are any W3C related issues (copyright). However, Ian, how do you think we could make this work? 00:47:17 Hixie: We might need to appoint a point man. The thing is to start requesting tests. Implementer will probably contribute tests too as they need them regardless. 00:47:45 Artb: I guess I would like to get some commitment on the creation of test from people from the Wg 00:49:12 Anne: I might contribute, but not actively until there is an implementation. 00:49:27 (and even then I might not) 00:49:40 yeah most people won't contribute until there are impls 00:49:51 that's why i think impls will have to come first, and provide the first tests 00:49:54 Marcos: Lachy and I have played around with Mikko's impl 00:50:12 ... it isn't complete but it has been helpful in the context of the Primer 00:52:23 Artb: can I get a volunteer to think about the test suite template? 00:52:52 ACTION: Cam and Lachy to create a test case template. 00:52:52 Sorry, couldn't find user - Cam 00:54:02 ACTION: McCormack work with Lachlan to create a test case template that makes sense for XBL2 test cases. 00:54:02 Created ACTION-81 - Work with Lachlan to create a test case template that makes sense for XBL2 test cases. [on Cameron McCormack - due 2007-04-25]. 00:54:09 Hixie: the problem with XBL is that there are so many different ways of embedding it into different documents. 00:55:46 Hixie: I think the best way to do the test suite would be to target different types of documents to cover a wide range of test cases. 00:56:19 Artb: we could be looking at hundreds if not thousands of tests. 00:56:44 MC: yes, the problem being that there is no one host language for XBL. 00:56:57 s/MC:/CM: 00:59:11 CM: it's might be best to just start some simple test cases in HTML as that might be the biggest use case for XBL. 00:59:30 Artb: does anyone have anything else about the test suite? 00:59:36 none... 01:00:45 Artb: lets talk about the potential implementations. We took a sample of potential implementers three months ago so it might be good to take another sample now. 01:00:56 Mikko, you around? 01:00:59 ACTION: Barstow contact Mikko to determine HUT implemenation plan for their JS-based XBL2 implementation 01:00:59 Created ACTION-82 - Contact Mikko to determine HUT implemenation plan for their JS-based XBL2 implementation [on Arthur Barstow - due 2007-04-25]. 01:01:40 Artb: CM, have you got any plans to implement anything? 01:02:30 I have vague plans to convert the sXBL implementation in Batik to XBL 2.0, which maybe I'll do around the end of the year. It's not high on my list of priorities though. 01:02:49 Artb: does nokia have any plans? 01:02:57 GR: not at this point. 01:03:23 Artb: Anne, any plans from Opera? 01:03:28 Anne: no comment 01:03:30 s/GR:/GG:/ 01:04:21 Artb: how about you Mark? is Microsoft interested in implementing? 01:04:41 MS: I really can't comment on if an when, but we are interested in it. 01:04:49 s/Mark?/Marc?/ 01:05:13 Marc, it's 30c today :D 01:05:51 Artb: Hixie, do you know if Mozilla is interested in implemented? 01:06:14 Hixie: they have the same position as microsoft... 01:07:12 ACTION: Barstow ping Apple about their XBL2 implementation plans. 01:07:12 Created ACTION-83 - Ping Apple about their XBL2 implementation plans. [on Arthur Barstow - due 2007-04-25]. 01:07:15 Artb: Apple joined the WG recently, but we are unsure if they are interested in XBL 01:07:57 Artb: have you chatted with David Hyatt at all about XBL and gotten any comments? 01:08:16 Hixie: yes, Apple said it needed further reviewing 01:09:27 Artb: When is the candidate expiration period? Somewhere in September I think. However any chance of getting out of candidate by then is probably 0. Do you know what the effect of that might be in relation to the w3c? 01:11:53 -??P2 01:11:55 -Ian_Hickson 01:12:20 -??P1 01:12:21 IA_WAF(F2F)8:00PM has ended 01:12:23 Attendees were Ian_Hickson 01:12:28 TOPIC: XBL2 Primer 01:24:29 Present: Art, Anne, Guido, Cameron, Lachlan, Marcos, Marc (XBL2), Hixie (XBL2) 01:28:44 scribenick: anne5 01:28:51 MC: So... 01:29:03 MC: ... I contacted LH 01:30:33 MC: See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-appformats/2007Apr/0009 01:31:23 MC: Need to look at use cases on the web. 01:31:32 MC: Content reordering will likely be common 01:31:44 MC: Start the primer with that... demonstrates bindings 01:32:06 ... should be simple enough and useful 01:33:25 GG: XBL might have use with Widgets. Making Ajax frameworks easier to use 01:33:50 MC: you have web development and there's web applications stuff like the Web 2.0 movement, libraries, blah 01:33:59 MC: start simple, move to app level 01:36:04 MC: [elaborates on the above e-mail] 01:39:53 AB: Why is reordering important? 01:40:08 MC: You might want to reorder content for mobile devices. etc. 01:40:22 GG: Does the author need to be involved? 01:40:33 AvK: yes 01:41:04 GG: CSS might be feasible as well 01:41:14 AvK: CSS doesn't allow reordering of actual elements though, like XBL 01:41:19 GG: Ah right, changing the tree-shape 01:47:47 [Some talk about how to use SVG to style elements through XBL, color pickers, sliders, progress bars, etc.] 01:48:48 ACTION: marcos to investigate a colour picker widget example (e.g. binding ) for the xbl primer 01:48:48 Created ACTION-84 - Investigate a colour picker widget example (e.g. binding ) for the xbl primer [on Marcos Caceres - due 2007-04-25]. 01:51:41 could create an XBL reference like these http://www.ilovejackdaniels.com/cheat-sheets/ 01:56:25 [Some discussion on XBL2 and HTML5.] 01:56:32 [And Web Forms 2] 02:07:42 http://www.w3.org/Member/Mail/AuditForm 02:28:21 ACTION: Marcos and Lachlan to have XBL2 Primer FPWD ready by July f2f meeting. 02:28:21 Created ACTION-85 - And Lachlan to have XBL2 Primer FPWD ready by July f2f meeting. [on Marcos Caceres - due 2007-04-25]. 02:35:39 rrsagent, make log public 02:35:47 rrsagent, make minutes 02:35:47 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/04/18-waf-minutes.html artb 02:58:21 Zakim has left #waf 04:04:13 jcantera has joined #waf 04:44:35 yes 04:44:53 are you mutted¿ 04:45:43 ok 04:51:05 scribenick: anne 04:51:11 scribenick: anne5 04:51:33 AB: [explains history of web app delivery] 04:52:11 AB: charter expects a XUL-like language deliverable 04:52:18 AB: pushed by Nexaweb + Telefonica 04:53:18 AB: rest of the WG felt like the work should be about improving existing work as opposed to doing something new 04:53:28 AB: progress has been slow 04:55:23 AB: HTML, XHTML2 or DIAL might better address this stuff 04:55:44 s/might better/might be better to/ 04:56:39 JC: 1. we recognize that this work is only driven by two companies in the WAF WG 04:56:59 JC: has been very difficult 04:57:10 JC: two companies is not enough 05:00:26 JC: 2. more companies should be involved 05:01:00 AB: do you have data that suggests that other members will actively participate in this work? 05:01:04 JC: not at the moment 05:04:00 Topic: charter update 05:04:19 AB: we need a charter update to more accurately reflect what we're doing 05:06:34 AB: Since only 2 of the 400 members are interested in the DFAUI deliverable we should really think about i 05:06:39 s/about i/about it/ 05:07:53 JC: I agree that an XG might be a solution 05:08:06 JC: for the DFAUI work 05:08:55 JC: I don't think it's an issue that only a couple of companies are involved. 05:10:59 scribenick: marcos 05:12:43 AB: we want a charter that accurately reflects what we are doing. I think we should use the rechartering process to work out how to move the DFAUI forward. The good thing about doing this work in an incubator is that it provides a great deal of flexibility (ie, select your own chair, set your own timeframe). 05:13:14 schepers_ has joined #waf 05:14:01 AB: I guess it would be good for you guys to continue to look how specs at the w3c meet the use case and requirements of DFAUI to identify gaps. 05:16:58 JC: I don't see as realistic progressing the work in relation to HTML5 as HTML might be too basic for what we need. 05:22:02 MC: I don't see any use cases that can't be addressed by HTML5. I would like to see concrete evidence that HTML 5 is not already a DFAUI. 05:25:01 Artb: I'm suggesting that the DFAUI work move to an incubator group. 05:25:27 JC: I agree that that could be a solution we could explore. 05:26:48 ...art explains what is the process of an incubator group as he understands it... 05:28:36 Artb: the work under the incubator group could then delegate how the actual DFAUI could be progressed by exploring further what other working groups are doing and which groups could potentially meet the requirements of the DFAUI 05:30:01 ...art continues to explain what an Incubator group... 05:30:40 ACTION: Arthur Barstrow to talk to Chris Lilly about how we go through rechartering 05:30:40 Created ACTION-86 - Barstrow to talk to Chris Lilly about how we go through rechartering [on Arthur Barstow - due 2007-04-25]. 05:32:49 Artb: I've had to report to W3C management continuously that there has been no progress on the DFAUI and this may soon become a concern for the w3c. 05:35:56 JC: we should not make any decisions without Coach here. 05:36:02 AB: agreed 05:36:55 AB: I need to speak to Chris Lilly about the rechartering process and set up a teleconf so we can discuss how to best more this work forward 05:37:32 AB: without coach, my recommendation is that we don't review the DFAUI use case and reqs document 05:37:44 JC: agreed 05:38:40 JC: What do you need to start an incubator group? 05:38:51 Incubator Group Activity: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ 05:40:40 AB: does anyone else have anything else regarding this topic? 05:41:23 schepers has joined #waf 05:42:20 JC: I am a bit concerned about the timing. 05:42:36 AB: I will speak to Chris about the timing and get back to you. 05:43:26 Topic XBL2 Primer 05:43:58 JC: what is the status of the Primer? 05:44:20 MC: Lachlan and I have some work to do. 05:44:43 ... We do not expect a FPWD until July or so 05:49:36 Coach has joined #waf 05:51:08 anyone on? 05:51:24 Coach? 05:51:31 DFAUI discussion just sort of ended 05:51:35 yes. 05:51:37 ok. 05:51:46 now i can go back to sleep now. 05:51:52 nn 05:51:57 :) 06:33:19 scribe: Lachy 06:33:40 GG: we've talked about the need for digitally signing widgets 06:35:01 GG: proposal is based on XML Sig 06:35:42 GG: Solution is capable of signing parts of a widget 06:35:52 GG: May or may not be needed 06:36:23 cwei has joined #waf 06:36:23 GG: [shows examples] 06:36:56 GG: more than one signature possible. e.g. author and distributor could each sign it separately 06:37:56 GG: is that the way forward? If not, we may need another solution 06:38:43 CM: Has it been compared with other signing techniques? e.g. Java JAR files 06:40:35 MC: [describes Yahoo's technique] 06:41:49 MC: This is just one option, there are other possibilities 06:42:31 MC: currently having problems with signature authorities 06:43:02 isn't there going to be a discussion around DFAUI now (from 2am ET)? 06:43:51 It ended pretty much the first time you joined. 06:44:02 Jose was online back then as well and it was discussed with him. 06:44:13 We're now discussing signatures for Widgets. 06:44:27 oh...i thought it should start at 2am. and i was you were joking. 06:44:40 i thought you were joking. 06:45:48 I was not. 06:45:53 [discussion of certificate authorities and public keys, and how they would work with widgets] 06:47:09 Coach: it was supposed to start at 14:00 local time here in Brisbane, though it started at about 14:45 06:47:27 And it's now 16:47 local time fwiw. 06:48:21 MC: We should probably recommend support for X509 06:49:33 AvK: xml:id broke XML Canonicalisation 06:49:58 AvK: XML Canoicalisation is being fixed 06:51:22 MC: Use case for sig is that users need to be able to verify the distributor 06:52:00 CM: Sigs have benefit of integrity checking 06:52:51 Coach has left #waf 06:56:54 MC: This may not be as difficult as Yahoo!'s solution 06:57:30 MC: Possibility that some things may not be signed 06:57:40 GG: Should probably require everything to be signed 06:58:27 AB: Any objections to this proposal? 06:59:31 AvK: Integrating this and getting it to work may be difficult 07:01:13 ACTION: Complete the proposal for widget signing 07:01:13 Sorry, couldn't find user - Complete 07:01:25 ACTION: Guido Complete the proposal for widget signing 07:01:25 Created ACTION-87 - Complete the proposal for widget signing [on Guido Grassel - due 2007-04-25]. 07:02:16 AB: Let's diiscuss the Widgets spec and pick up where we left off 07:03:55 AvK: The way the security model works has implications on how other things work 07:04:55 http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/waf/widgets/Overview.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8 07:06:41 http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/waf/widgets/ 07:08:53 http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/waf/widgets/Overview.src.html 07:10:23 AvK: Probably want to be able to specify access rights and restrictions 07:11:34 GG: Widgets can't have access to other widgets or the browser 07:12:02 GG: Should be able to white/black listing 07:12:06 ... of domains 07:13:39 AvK: a widget is just a special type of application, why should it have restrictions beyond those of other apps? 07:14:22 GG: Widgets may request permission from users 07:14:34 AvK: Users will just say ok without understanding the question 07:15:46 AvK: Would be ok to be able to turn on/off network and/or file access 07:16:19 AvK: [asks about Firefox Extensions security model] 07:19:38 MC: White lists may just list malicious sites 07:21:07 LH: author specified white lists can't work securely 07:22:11 MC: UIs for requesting access from the user are confusing 07:32:19 [current discussion being recorded in the issue list in the draft] 07:39:25 [Discussing Widget Geometry] 07:40:02 AvK: The WebAPI WG is specifying the Window object 07:40:52 AB: Can we move the widget geometry to another spec? 07:41:05 ... like the Window API spec 07:41:27 AvK: Could move it to HTML5 07:42:54 [Discussion about whether or not we should require widgets to use HTML] 07:43:33 AvK: We have to define how HTML works in a widget 07:43:47 AvK: HTML and SVG will most likely be the dominant formats 07:44:09 MC: Yahoo doesn't use HTML for their widgets 07:48:01 AvK: We should definately use rel=widget 07:48:12 AvK: The type attribute shouldn't be required 07:48:40 MC: Why reference HTML5 instead of HTML4? 07:52:32 LH: We could get away with referencing HTML4 for the link element 07:53:16 Anne's input: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-appformats/2007Apr/0010.html 07:53:42 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-appformats/2007Apr/0010.html 07:53:51 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-appformats/2007Apr/0011.html 07:56:39 [Anne is describing the proposal from Lachy and himself] 08:07:03 CM: rename description to desc, get its default value from the desc element if it's an svg main fil 08:07:06 s/fil/file/ 08:09:52 [some dispute about the proposed element name] 08:10:09 MC and AB like the idea of

08:11:17 AvK: ? 08:11:20 LH: ? 08:11:21 I've proposed , and 08:11:38 AB: doesn't like 08:11:49 LH doesn't like naming debates 08:12:07 I don't like 08:13:09 AvK: I can't spell main 08:14:09 rrsagent, make minutes 08:14:09 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/04/18-waf-minutes.html artb 08:15:33 Present: Art, Anne, Guido, Cameron, Lachlan, Marcos, Marc_(XBL2), Hixie_(XBL2), Jose (DFAUI) 08:15:47 main is non-obvious and doesn't make much sense here 08:16:04 RESOLUTION: use rather than 08:16:13 rrsagent, make minutes 08:16:13 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/04/18-waf-minutes.html artb