IRC log of waf on 2008-02-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:57:54 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #waf

19:57:54 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/02/06-waf-irc

19:57:56 [trackbot-ng]

RRSAgent, make logs member

19:57:56 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #waf

19:57:58 [trackbot-ng]

Zakim, this will be WAF

19:57:58 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot-ng; I see IA_WAF()3:00PM scheduled to start in 3 minutes

19:57:59 [trackbot-ng]

Meeting: Web Application Formats Working Group Teleconference

19:57:59 [trackbot-ng]

Date: 06 February 2008

19:58:11 [ArtB]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-appformats/2008Feb/0027.html

19:58:13 [MikeSmith]

zakim, code?

19:58:13 [Zakim]

the conference code is 9231 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), MikeSmith

19:58:39 [Zakim]

IA_WAF()3:00PM has now started

19:58:46 [Zakim]

+??P3

19:58:51 [ArtB]

rrsagent, make logs public

19:58:53 [anne]

Zakim. who is om the phone?

19:58:58 [MikeSmith]

Zakim, ??P3 is me

19:58:58 [Zakim]

+MikeSmith; got it

19:59:06 [anne]

Zakim. who is on the phone?

19:59:18 [Zakim]

+MSEder

19:59:29 [ArtB]

zakim, MSEder is ArtB

19:59:29 [Zakim]

+ArtB; got it

20:00:10 [anne]

Zakim, who is on the phone?

20:00:10 [Zakim]

On the phone I see MikeSmith, ArtB

20:03:37 [Zakim]

+Dave_Orchard

20:04:39 [dorchard]

dorchard has joined #waf

20:04:48 [dorchard]

zakim, who's on the phone?

20:04:48 [Zakim]

On the phone I see MikeSmith, ArtB, Dave_Orchard

20:05:18 [anne]

ArtB, k

20:05:25 [Zakim]

+[Mozilla]

20:05:48 [sicking]

sicking has joined #waf

20:06:01 [ArtB]

zakim, Mozilla is Sicking

20:06:01 [Zakim]

+Sicking; got it

20:06:17 [anne]

Zakim, passcode?

20:06:17 [Zakim]

the conference code is 9231 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), anne

20:06:23 [ArtB]

Scribe: Art

20:06:29 [ArtB]

ScribeNick: ArtB

20:06:32 [ArtB]

Chair: Art

20:06:45 [Zakim]

+anne

20:06:54 [ArtB]

Present: Art, Jonas, David, Mike, Anne, Thomas (IRC)

20:07:01 [ArtB]

Topic: Review Agenda

20:07:46 [ArtB]

AB: we will skip #2 and #3 since there were no comments on those agenda items

20:08:09 [ArtB]

Topic: Proposal for a way to avoid round-trip ...

20:08:36 [ArtB]

AB: Anne, what's the status?

20:08:42 [ArtB]

AvK: pending some comments

20:08:51 [ArtB]

... integrated in the ED now

20:09:13 [ArtB]

AB: who are you waiting for comments from?

20:09:24 [ArtB]

AvK: everyone i.e. no one in particular

20:09:31 [ArtB]

... Jonas had some comments

20:09:45 [ArtB]

JS: not much we can do to tweak this

20:10:06 [ArtB]

... not sure we can do what Mark wants

20:10:31 [ArtB]

JS: I think the current spec is as secure as it can be made

20:10:47 [ArtB]

AvK: Google says its important as well as the REST guys

20:11:19 [ArtB]

AB: does this proposal address the issues the REST guys made

20:11:24 [ArtB]

AvK: yes, I think so

20:11:31 [ArtB]

JS: but they haven't responded as such

20:11:48 [ArtB]

DO: I found it hard to follow; not sure how it all works together

20:12:01 [ArtB]

... may be waiting for it to be integrated in the spec

20:12:10 [ArtB]

AvK: I've also added examples to the spec

20:12:30 [ArtB]

... I think I've addressed their concerns

20:12:51 [ArtB]

... If 10 posts, need to do 12 requests total and that's not too bad

20:13:03 [ArtB]

JS: would still like to get some more feedback from them

20:13:13 [ArtB]

AvK: I agree explicit consent would be better

20:13:33 [ArtB]

JS: there a couple of minor details I still want to change but they aren't behavioral

20:13:42 [ArtB]

... e.g. some stuff with the slashes

20:13:56 [ArtB]

AvK: must start with a slash but doesn't have to end with one

20:14:30 [ArtB]

JS: if I have the foo dir is /foo or /foo/?

20:14:39 [ArtB]

... not clear where to put the policy

20:15:29 [ArtB]

JS: it would be good to get some more feedback on the URI syntax

20:15:41 [ArtB]

AvK: agree but that would be relatively easy to change

20:17:00 [ArtB]

AB: agree we need more review and "explicit consent"; how do we get that?

20:17:09 [ArtB]

DO: typically would publish a new WD

20:17:42 [ArtB]

AvK: could you send an email to Mark, Tyler, and others?

20:17:52 [ArtB]

DO: Stuart and I also raised related concerns

20:17:57 [MikeSmith]

Tyler is Tyler Close

20:18:09 [ArtB]

AvK: would like to get quick feedback

20:18:34 [ArtB]

DO: the reqs seem to be settling but this is a big change thus a new WD seems like the right way to go

20:18:50 [ArtB]

AvK: I suppose a new WD would be OK but prefer a LC

20:19:02 [ArtB]

... we could publish a WD and then in a few weeks go to LC

20:19:34 [ArtB]

DO: I think the changes are too substantial to go directly to LC

20:19:52 [ArtB]

AvK: there is a precedence to publish a FPWD and LC at the same time

20:20:05 [ArtB]

AB: any objections to an immediate new WD?

20:20:22 [ArtB]

AvK: don't want it to delay LC

20:20:42 [tlr]

zakim, call thomas-skype

20:20:42 [Zakim]

ok, tlr; the call is being made

20:20:44 [Zakim]

+Thomas

20:21:04 [ArtB]

AB: Mike, what is the Team's position?

20:21:16 [ArtB]

... on WD and LC?

20:22:32 [ArtB]

MS: I think there have been too many objections to this work item to publish this as an LC under the current charter and its extension

20:22:51 [ArtB]

... this isn't a final decision by the Team but that's where we stand now

20:23:22 [ArtB]

AvK: are these objections from the Team or Members? Where is the archive?

20:23:44 [ArtB]

MS: some on the public archive; some based on internal discussions

20:24:03 [ArtB]

AvK: I think we've addressed the issues raised

20:24:27 [ArtB]

MS: there is a question about whether this spec is within the group's charter

20:25:15 [ArtB]

... The charter is a bit broad

20:25:35 [ArtB]

... I think the group did this work in good faith

20:25:49 [ArtB]

... If people didn't pay attention, that's not this group's fault

20:26:12 [ArtB]

... I don't think anyone tried to "sneak in this work"

20:27:20 [dorchard]

I'm not sure what this means for the group publishing another Working Draft though...

20:27:37 [ArtB]

TR: I don't have much to add to what Mike said

20:28:06 [ArtB]

... There should not be a LC going out under the current charter

20:28:35 [ArtB]

MS: that is true i.e. that's the Team's consensus

20:29:33 [ArtB]

AvK: the Selectors spec in the Web API WG was able to go to LC

20:29:52 [ArtB]

... despite going out of charter

20:30:01 [ArtB]

TR: I don't know the specifics of that case

20:30:33 [ArtB]

JS: one reason this group started this work is because this mechanism is needed by XBL2

20:31:21 [ArtB]

AB: I agree and have argued that point

20:31:38 [ArtB]

... Seems like the problem is that we are now in this "limbo" state

20:31:46 [anne]

http://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-api/ is the precedent I was talking about

20:32:15 [ArtB]

MS: not clear how long it will take for the new charter to get approved

20:33:10 [ArtB]

... we have a combination of the "limbo" state but also not clear where this is going to end up in the next charters

20:33:24 [ArtB]

DO: we should be able to publish a new WD, right?

20:33:31 [ArtB]

... or is that not allowed?

20:34:27 [ArtB]

AB: yes, what is the answer Mike?

20:34:43 [ArtB]

MS: I can't make a decision now

20:34:44 [tlr]

q+

20:34:56 [ArtB]

AvK: when will you know?

20:35:36 [ArtB]

TR: based on my recollection - there will be no LC pub; I do not recall a decsion on the WD question

20:36:04 [ArtB]

... If the WG wants to publish a "normal" WD then the Team can discuss this

20:36:17 [ArtB]

AvK: we want not just a new WD but also a LC

20:36:18 [dorchard]

q+

20:36:21 [tlr]

q-

20:36:59 [MikeSmith]

q+ to say I can go ahead with plan to publish a WD first

20:37:00 [ArtB]

DO: I think we should publish a WD and not a LC regardless of precedence

20:37:19 [ArtB]

AvK: again, I'm OK with a WD now but then want a LC two weeks later

20:38:40 [ArtB]

AB: perhaps we can consensus to publish a WD now and then ask the Team to consider us publishing a LC during the extension period

20:39:22 [ArtB]

AvK: I think there is indeed a precedence for us to publish a LC during the extension period

20:40:04 [ArtB]

AB: I propose we publish a new WD ASAP

20:40:09 [ArtB]

AB: any objections?

20:40:26 [ArtB]

[none heard]

20:40:35 [ArtB]

AB: any changes you want to make Anne?

20:40:43 [ArtB]

AvK: just a few changes

20:40:56 [ArtB]

DO: and I have a couple of quick changes I'd like to get in

20:42:11 [ArtB]

MS: once we are ready, we should be able to get it published quickly

20:42:39 [ArtB]

RESOLUTION: publish a new WD as soon as Anne is ready

20:42:48 [ArtB]

DO: let's set a deadline for comments

20:43:00 [ArtB]

AB: OK

20:43:14 [ArtB]

AvK: let's set the target for next Tuesday

20:43:47 [ArtB]

ACTION: Mike determine the Team's position on us publishing a LC version during this extension period

20:43:47 [trackbot-ng]

Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Mike

20:43:47 [trackbot-ng]

Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. mamend, mike)

20:44:30 [MikeSmith]

ACTION: Michael(tm) to determine the Team's position on us publishing a LC version during this extension perioad

20:44:30 [trackbot-ng]

Created ACTION-167 - Determine the Team's position on us publishing a LC version during this extension perioad [on Michael(tm) Smith - due 2008-02-13].

20:44:32 [tlr]

I have no such sense.

20:44:52 [ArtB]

AB: Mike, when do you expect the charter to go out for formal AC review?

20:45:14 [tlr]

s/no such sense/no good sense when charter review will happen/

20:45:46 [ArtB]

MS: I will push this and hope to get it out next week

20:46:02 [ArtB]

AB: ok, great

20:46:43 [tlr]

MS: I will report back to the group when I have a clearer idea; can't do that today, though

20:47:25 [MikeSmith]

tlr - thanks

20:48:04 [Zakim]

-Thomas

20:49:32 [MikeSmith]

q?

20:49:38 [MikeSmith]

q-

20:49:54 [ArtB]

Topic: Issue #21

20:51:01 [ArtB]

AB: are there any gaps or holes that need to be filled?

20:51:15 [ArtB]

... the latest ED contains a lot of info to address this issue

20:51:59 [ArtB]

JS: we used to have a description about what can currently be done regarding XSS but it was removed

20:52:19 [ArtB]

... would like to know why it was removed because it seems like that info is relevant for the Security Model

20:52:53 [ArtB]

AvK: I think we just changed the Intro; it's bit more abstract now

20:53:03 [ArtB]

... we still mention the Same Origin Policy

20:53:31 [ArtB]

AB: Jonas, can you identify the text you'd like to get added?

20:53:40 [ArtB]

JS: yes, I can submit something

20:56:10 [ArtB]

ACTION: Jonas submit an input that will result in closing Issue #21

20:56:10 [trackbot-ng]

Created ACTION-168 - Submit an input that will result in closing Issue #21 [on Jonas Sicking - due 2008-02-13].

20:56:52 [MikeSmith]

action-155?

20:56:52 [trackbot-ng]

ACTION-155 -- Jonas Sicking to send a request for comments regarding the policy decision questions and issues -- due 2008-01-30 -- CLOSED

20:56:52 [trackbot-ng]

http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/waf/actions/155

20:57:15 [MikeSmith]

issue-21?

20:57:15 [trackbot-ng]

ISSUE-21 -- What is the Security Model for the access-control spec? -- RAISED

20:57:15 [trackbot-ng]

http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/waf/issues/21

20:57:40 [ArtB]

Topic: Issue #20

20:58:42 [ArtB]

AB: have a detailed discussion on the mail list

20:59:53 [ArtB]

... we've had inputs from Thomas, Tyler, Jonas and maybe others

20:59:58 [ArtB]

... Jonas: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-appformats/2008Feb/0007.html

21:00:30 [ArtB]

... just want to discuss how to get consensus and keep the technical discussion on the mail list

21:01:00 [ArtB]

JS: need to have some policy enforcement in the client

21:01:17 [ArtB]

AvK: I want to close

21:01:32 [ArtB]

DO: I'm still concerned about this issue

21:01:48 [ArtB]

... we've been discussing this issue internally

21:01:56 [ArtB]

... I'm not prepared to close it now

21:02:03 [ArtB]

JS: but we need feedback on this issue

21:02:21 [ArtB]

DO: I understand; it's been hard to get the right people in BEA involved

21:02:37 [ArtB]

... I've been talking to other people too; I'm active on it

21:03:03 [ArtB]

JS: currently client PEP adds complexity

21:03:17 [ArtB]

... wonder if we have added to many features

21:03:24 [Zakim]

-MikeSmith

21:03:31 [ArtB]

... but I'll post my comments on the mail list

21:03:44 [dorchard]

dorchard has joined #waf

21:06:23 [billyjack]

billyjack has joined #waf

21:06:33 [ArtB]

[ some discussion missing ... ]

21:07:03 [billyjack]

Zakim, code?

21:07:03 [Zakim]

the conference code is 9231 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), billyjack

21:07:26 [anne]

sicking:

21:07:27 [ArtB]

Topic: Issue #22 ac4csr-webarch

21:07:39 [Zakim]

+[IPcaller]

21:07:50 [anne]

sicking, so dropping method whitelisting?

21:07:53 [billyjack]

Zakim, IPcaller is me

21:07:53 [Zakim]

+billyjack; got it

21:08:01 [sicking]

anne, yes

21:08:46 [ArtB]

AB: what should we do with this?

21:08:47 [anne]

seems fine to me... less text :)

21:08:58 [ArtB]

DO: I thought the Hixie and Anne proposal addressed it

21:09:03 [ArtB]

AvK: yes I agree

21:09:15 [ArtB]

DO: I think we should resolve it as closed

21:09:38 [ArtB]

ACTION: Orchard close issue #22

21:09:38 [trackbot-ng]

Created ACTION-169 - Close issue #22 [on David Orchard - due 2008-02-13].

21:09:58 [ArtB]

Topic: AOB

21:10:20 [ArtB]

AB: do we want to have a call next week?

21:10:26 [ArtB]

AvK: I'm fine either way

21:10:43 [ArtB]

DO: hopefully we should have just published a WD and may not have much to talk about

21:10:50 [ArtB]

AB: I tend to agree

21:10:55 [ArtB]

AvK: what about two week?

21:11:21 [ArtB]

AB: sounds good and hopefull Mike will have an answer from tthe Team regarding LC by then

21:11:44 [ArtB]

JS: Mozilla is going to do a security review next Tuesday

21:11:57 [ArtB]

... it is open to the public and anyone can dial in

21:12:04 [ArtB]

... I will post details to the mail list

21:12:18 [ArtB]

AB: listen mode only OK?

21:12:22 [ArtB]

JS: absolutely

21:13:00 [ArtB]

MS: yes, two weeks should be enough time

21:13:14 [ArtB]

AB: no call next week; next call on Feb 20

21:13:32 [Zakim]

-Dave_Orchard

21:13:41 [ArtB]

AB: meeting adjourned

21:13:41 [Zakim]

-anne

21:13:43 [Zakim]

-billyjack

21:13:45 [Zakim]

-Sicking

21:13:46 [Zakim]

-ArtB

21:13:46 [Zakim]

IA_WAF()3:00PM has ended

21:13:47 [Zakim]

Attendees were MikeSmith, ArtB, Dave_Orchard, Sicking, anne, Thomas, billyjack

21:13:55 [ArtB]

rrsagent, make minutes

21:13:55 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/06-waf-minutes.html ArtB

21:14:34 [ArtB]

Present: Art, Anne, Mike, Jonas, David, Thomas

21:14:41 [ArtB]

rrsagent, make minutes

21:14:41 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/06-waf-minutes.html ArtB

21:15:02 [ArtB]

zakim, bye

21:15:02 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #waf

21:19:58 [ArtB]

rrsagent, bye

21:19:58 [RRSAgent]

I see 4 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/06-waf-actions.rdf :

21:19:58 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Mike determine the Team's position on us publishing a LC version during this extension period [1]

21:19:58 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/06-waf-irc#T20-43-47

21:19:58 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Michael(tm) to determine the Team's position on us publishing a LC version during this extension perioad [2]

21:19:58 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/06-waf-irc#T20-44-30

21:19:58 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Jonas submit an input that will result in closing Issue #21 [3]

21:19:58 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/06-waf-irc#T20-56-10

21:19:58 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Orchard close issue #22 [4]

21:19:58 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/06-waf-irc#T21-09-38