07:17:18 RRSAgent has joined #wam 07:17:18 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/10/20-wam-irc 07:17:24 that reminds me, i should d/l the maps + favorite the addresses 07:17:43 Meeting: Widgets f2f Meeting 07:17:48 Date: 20 October 2008 07:18:04 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/WidgetsMandelieuAgenda 07:18:14 Chair: Art 07:18:17 Scribe: Art 07:18:22 ScribeNick: ArtB 07:19:11 Present: Mark, David, Claudio, Benoit, Marcos, Art, Arve, Mike, Fabrice_Desre 07:20:19 10a. Can you invite zakim? 07:20:28 Zakim has joined #wam 07:20:44 zakim, this is Widgets 07:20:44 ok, abarsto; that matches IA_WebApps(Widgets)3:00AM 07:20:45 marcos has joined #wam 07:26:54 Topic: Introductions 07:28:15 [ round robin of Widgets people mostly ] 07:28:25 Fabrice: Orange/FT AC rep 07:28:40 Topic: Agenda review and tweaking 07:28:53 AB: agenda: http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/WidgetsMandelieuAgenda 07:32:40 AB: any changes or additions? 07:32:56 MP: what about OpenAjax's API style guide? 07:33:36 AB: how about I add it to AOB? 07:33:39 MP: OK 07:33:54 AB: I can also ask Chaals to let us know if/when he discusses it 07:35:21 Topic: Issue #46 - I18N 07:35:42 AB: what remains to be done with this issue? 07:36:05 MC: I have addressed this issue in the spec 07:36:27 ... The main issue is how to address LtoR and RtoL in the same piece of text 07:36:41 ... I added OPTIONAL support for the ITS' span element 07:37:40 ... If supported must support its:dir atrribute too 07:38:09 ... Not clear if we need to bind its:dir to widgets description or name element. 07:38:20 ... Thus I need to clarify with the I18N WG 07:38:35 ... This also means I needed to change our RELAXNG schema 07:39:45 AB: any recommendations on the its:dir binding issue? 07:40:07 ... It would be optional, right? 07:40:13 MC: yes, it would be optional 07:40:25 AB: OK, so we leave this open for now 07:40:46 ... and try to close it by the end of this meeting. 07:41:00 MC: If I can meet with Felix we can close this today 07:41:07 MS: yes, I can make that intro. 07:53:21 -Josh_Soref 07:53:23 IA_WebApps(Widgets)3:00AM has ended 07:53:23 Attendees were Josh_Soref 07:56:17 tlr has joined #wam 07:56:21 drogersuk has joined #wam 07:58:20 arve has joined #wam 07:58:47 ArtB has joined #wam 07:59:01 RRSAgent, make minutes 07:59:01 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/20-wam-minutes.html ArtB 07:59:55 cla has joined #wam 08:00:12 MC: this issue surfaces because ZIP encodes filename differently on different OS's e.g. Mac does it one way and Widows does something differentMS: if we are doing something differently from other specs i.e. the URI or IRI specs, I would be concernedAB: does this mean there is a hole in the IRI specMC: no; the problem is different OS's handling... we need to take care of these interop probsAB: action plan is what then? 08:00:43 RRSAgent, make log public 08:00:48 RRSAgent, make minutes 08:00:48 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/20-wam-minutes.html ArtB 08:01:17 [ MC demonstrates some of the interop issues ... ] 08:01:37 AB: what's the action plan? 08:01:45 MC: I need to implement what's spec'ed 08:02:11 AB: does this need to be done before LC? 08:02:18 MC: yes 08:02:20 MikeSmith has joined #wam 08:02:27 AB: can anyone help Marcos? 08:02:45 [ No voluneeters :-( ] 08:03:23 BS: can someone here at the TPAC help? 08:03:49 MC: it's a bit ugly and nitty-gritty 08:03:53 ... but I can do it 08:04:05 ... Need to actually look at the ZIP files in hex 08:04:31 [ MC shows HexEdit example of a .zip file ] 08:05:17 IA_WebApps(Widgets)3:00AM has now started 08:05:25 +Josh_Soref 08:05:53 ScribeNick: ArtB 08:06:18 Present+ Paddy 08:07:18 shepazu has joined #wam 08:08:05 MC: if not utf8, use cp437 08:08:12 Zakim, call Mike 08:08:13 ok, MikeSmith; the call is being made 08:08:14 +Mike 08:08:57 Zakim, call Iles_A 08:08:57 ok, MikeSmith; the call is being made 08:08:58 +Iles_A 08:10:02 MC: I think Josh can help me 08:10:06 Present+ Josh 08:10:10 Zakim, drop Mike 08:10:10 Mike is being disconnected 08:10:10 -Mike 08:10:52 RRSAgent, make minutes 08:10:52 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/20-wam-minutes.html ArtB 08:12:59 Topic: Section 5.4 Need validator's point of view 08:13:05 MC: this was raised by Dom 08:13:41 ... I added some related text to the definitions 08:14:09 ... Also need to reflect the view of a validator 08:14:26 ... I don't think this is a high priority 08:14:37 ... If someone wants to contribute, that would be good 08:14:55 AB: any volunteers for a conformance checker? 08:15:19 ... perhaps we can some W3C staff/webreq help 08:15:24 ... I'll check with Mike 08:15:44 ACTION: Barstow see if the W3C systeam/webreq can help with a conformance checker 08:15:44 Created ACTION-257 - See if the W3C systeam/webreq can help with a conformance checker [on Arthur Barstow - due 2008-10-27]. 08:15:47 marcos has joined #wam 08:16:17 mpriestl has joined #wam 08:17:08 AB: I would imagine that type of service could be included in a Widget repository service 08:17:41 MC: something like this could be added to validator.nu 08:17:49 AB: this is Henri's service? 08:18:19 MC: yes, but just giving a schema isn't that helpful 08:18:32 .. need to provide "hints" too 08:19:08 ... I believe validator.nu is Open Source so we could roll our own service 08:20:10 MC: the note in Section 5.4 has been removed since I think its priority is too low 08:20:35 Topic: Section 5.5 Need for a MIME type 08:20:52 AB: http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/#mime-type 08:21:59 AB: a potential sub-issue here is Security Concerns 08:22:40 AB: I would expect IANA to have a template for what's required 08:23:31 ... RFC 4289 defines the process 08:28:03 -Josh_Soref 08:29:29 [ We spend some type looking at the W3C/IANA MIME registration procedures ] 08:29:40 AB: do we need to complete the template? 08:29:51 ... We can check the precedence 08:30:17 AB: a question I have is if we need to complete the template before we publish a LC doc 08:31:49 Topic: Version String in Section 6.14 08:32:11 AB: http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/#the-version (now in section 6.15) 08:32:18 AB: what are you looking for? 08:32:23 MC: that should be there 08:32:41 s/should be there/should not be there/ 08:32:58 MC: this should be in the update spec, not P&C 08:33:25 MP: if it is in the Update spec then where? 08:33:32 MC: in the update element 08:34:09 MP: if you want version info in the widget but won't have an update, what do you do? 08:35:27 PB: so version attribute on widget element remains? 08:35:30 MC: yes 08:36:03 AB: so the update element will have a verison attribute too? 08:36:05 MC: yes 08:37:28 arve has joined #wam 08:38:11 ACTION: Macros move the version string section from P&C spec to the Updates spec 08:38:11 Sorry, couldn't find user - Macros 08:38:53 ACTION: Marcos move the version string section from P&C spec to the Updates spec 08:38:53 Created ACTION-260 - Move the version string section from P&C spec to the Updates spec [on Marcos Caceres - due 2008-10-27]. 08:41:09 MC: there is another spec being written by David Orchard re template for attributes 08:41:39 ... I have used text from URI Template (RFC working draft) 08:41:52 timeless has joined #wam 08:42:21 ACTION: Barstow determine the status of URI Template RFC and report back to WG 08:42:21 Created ACTION-261 - Determine the status of URI Template RFC and report back to WG [on Arthur Barstow - due 2008-10-27]. 08:43:29 MC: another discussion we can have is the use of this template mechanism for other elements in the Updates spec 08:44:02 AB: do we need to consider its usage in the P&C spec? 08:44:03 MC: no 08:48:35 MC: we can use OMA's DL spec e.g. for status codes 08:48:44 ... regarding the Update spec. 08:50:37 Topic: Section 7 Need to add cp437 text 08:50:55 AB: the agenda mentions this issue but I think it has now been addressed 08:51:00 ... Is that right, Marcos? 08:51:33 MC: yes, consider this part of the URI/IRI proc model discussion we had earlier. 08:51:42 [ Take a Coffee Break ] 08:51:50 RRSAgent, make minutes 08:51:50 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/20-wam-minutes.html ArtB 09:05:55 tlr has joined #wam 09:23:48 Present+ Sophie_Aveline 09:24:08 drogersuk has joined #wam 09:24:45 Present+ Hyunjeong_Lee 09:25:04 Present+ Nick 09:25:50 Topic: Section 8.2 - What do we do if run out of space? 09:25:54 AB: status Marcos? 09:26:08 MC: I removed this because it is an implementation issue 09:26:21 ... Josh added this 09:26:37 ABe: I agree it is an implementation detail for the P&C spec 09:26:56 ... also agree it is a real implemenation detail for an implemenation 09:27:39 claudio has joined #wam 09:28:22 MC: I changed related text http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/#extracting 09:30:06 ABe: I think the new text is sufficient 09:30:18 AB: Josh, what do you think (you raised this issue)? 09:31:42 MC: I would expect an impl to use the ZIP header to determine the space needed and do the right thing 09:32:00 JS: this is OK with me 09:32:32 Topic: Section 8.2, Step #10 - How to handle SVG Icon Formats 09:32:54 AB: see http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/#step-10 09:34:07 AB: what can we expect to do with this issue? 09:34:16 MC: we need feedback from implementors 09:34:50 ... need to understand the interactivity e.g. if the SVG has some JavaScript 09:35:13 paddy has joined #wam 09:35:14 ABe: the JS could run outside of the widget 09:35:30 ... We wouldn't be able to do anything about security in that case 09:35:52 arve has joined #wam 09:36:13 MC: my feeling is we should drop SVG for v1 09:36:20 ... and add it to v2 09:36:54 ABe: the problem that will introduce is that most operators will require SVG for icon formats 09:37:02 MP: yes, I believe that is true for us 09:37:35 JS: it's not just a graphics format (and static) but it can also be an app format i.e. actually running as the "main" widget 09:38:17 CV: we need to support SVG Tiny 09:38:40 ... and 1.2 is preferred 09:38:54 MC: we have an open issue regarding 1.1 vs 1.2 09:39:21 MC: the issue is how to handle the events on the icon e.g. via XHR 09:39:54 ... the question is do we allow that 09:40:13 ... Will it introduce too much implementation burden 09:40:58 BS: think the most important requirement is the image format 09:41:07 .. and interactivity is secondary importance 09:41:18 s/.. and/... and/ 09:41:43 ... I think the most common usage is static icon images 09:42:40 AB: any other comments? 09:42:54 MC: I think we should leave this as an impl detail 09:43:22 ... it is optional to support SVG as an icon format 09:43:51 AB: if we do that, what interop probs will there be? 09:45:07 JS: could add a should for widget authors re SVG icon format 09:46:01 ABe: not sure about use of should; could be too strong 09:46:17 ... perhaps should use MAY 09:46:42 MC: I've stopped using normative text regarding authoring reqs 09:46:51 JS: so it's more of a hint in this case? 09:46:53 MC: yes 09:47:02 ABe: we could remove the entire author req 09:47:12 MC: no, I disagree; want to keep it 09:47:25 MC: but those who want it will add; otherwise they won't 09:48:07 AB: are these "Author Requirements" non-normative? 09:48:21 MS: don't call them "Guidelines" 09:48:43 ... perhaps they should be in a sep doc 09:48:52 JS: we could leave them in for now 09:49:03 MC: yes, they could be in a separate doc 09:49:52 AB: are these Autho Reqs normative or non-normative? 09:50:07 MC: I think they should be Normative 09:51:12 MS: If we are going to build a validator, they should be Normative 09:52:07 MS: are there constraints that cannot be expressed in a schema? 09:52:15 MC: yes, some of the ZIP constraints 09:52:40 MS: if you want these reqs to be in the validator, they should be Normative 09:52:53 MC: agree; DOM raised a similar issue 09:53:36 Present+ Larry_Masinter 09:54:11 MC: perhaps the Author reqs should be changed to "Conformance Checker" 09:54:39 MS: that is what HTML5 does 09:54:54 ... with some text to qualify relationship to authoring 09:55:34 MC: I can re-write all of the Author Reqs to Conformance Reqs and make them all Normative 09:56:04 AB: any objections? 09:56:11 [ None ] 09:56:24 JS: should we check with Hixie re HTML5? 09:56:40 MC: I talked to HTML5 this morning 09:56:59 ... he is considering a script to move authoring stuff into a sep doc 09:57:43 JS: I'm OK with doing this way 09:57:55 MC: there is another issue 09:58:16 ... this could be a problem if we add a new "Product" 09:58:33 ... We would now have a 4th product. 09:59:03 ... And the Conformance Checker can claim conformance to the spec 09:59:15 AB: can you do that? 09:59:19 MC: yes, I can do that 09:59:34 ... let someone else create the Conformance Checker. 09:59:40 AB: any volunteers? 10:00:30 arve has joined #wam 10:01:05 RESOLUTION: all of the Author requirements will be changed to Conformance Checker requirements and all of these requirements will be Normative. 10:01:25 LM: I don't recall seeing a good definition of Conformance Checker 10:01:32 MC: I hope that isn't a rat hole 10:02:04 MC: HTML5 attempts to make such a definition 10:02:17 MS: we could look at what has been done in HTML5 10:03:47 Topic: Section 8.2, Step #11 - Is additional security model needed here? 10:04:07 AB: http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/#step-11 10:04:44 AB: what 10:04:50 ... is the issue? 10:05:08 MC: this may be out of scope for this spec 10:05:53 ... Not sure we need to go beyond what is specified 10:06:27 AB: what do people think? 10:07:07 PB: not sure what the security issue is 10:07:34 MC: need to spec how to put something on the screen and what we need to say about runtime requirements 10:07:59 ... eg. if the widget tries to do something that raises a security exception 10:08:52 ... What do we specify regarding instantiation e.g. security policies 10:09:17 MC: does HTML5 deal with this? 10:09:35 MS: the latest ED of HTMl5 doesn't say anything about rendering 10:09:51 MC: I could talk to Hixie 10:10:03 MS: we could ask for an Editor to draft some text 10:10:48 PB: within BONDI, we are interesting in the security policy related to the instantiation 10:11:02 s/are interesting/are interested/ 10:11:39 MC: we used to have a step #12 which tried to deal with this 10:11:53 ... but it was remove because this is out of scope 10:12:46 AB: I'm OK with leaving step #11 as is 10:15:49 AB: any objections to deleting the security model issue from Step #11? 10:15:55 [ None ] 10:16:28 RESOLUTION: Step #11 of the P&C will not address the security model 10:17:39 ABe: I'm uncomfortable with separating the P&C spec from Security Model 10:17:57 ... e.g. it could create some new authoring issues 10:18:06 MC: we do need to spec the security models 10:18:23 ... expect BONDI to do some relevant work here that we may be able to use 10:18:45 ... expect a separate policy doc from the config doc 10:19:07 MP: agree, we envision the policy doc as a separate from the config doc 10:19:41 MC: we could bind the config doc to the policy doc via the feature element 10:20:49 MP: we need to discus how to bind the security policy to the config doc 10:20:54 ... could use the feature element 10:21:20 ... Could add a new permissions element to the access element 10:21:32 ... and it could contain a string that defines a permission 10:22:08 MC: do you have an example of use case? 10:22:47 PB: from MIDP, can use an API to open any channel (e.g. BT, Socket, HTTP) 10:23:30 ... If want generic APIs, need a way to grant permissions 10:24:43 MP: may need to have different policies for different APIs 10:25:33 [ Marcos enters an example into his ED draft ] 10:27:42 Option 1: 10:27:58 Option 2. 10:27:58 10:27:58 10:28:49 AB: we will add this topic to the agenda this afternoon or tomorrow 11:38:44 ArtB has joined #wam 11:39:06 RRSAgent, make minutes 11:39:06 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/20-wam-minutes.html ArtB 11:39:56 RRSAgent, make minutes 11:39:56 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/20-wam-minutes.html ArtB 11:43:00 paddy has joined #wam 11:43:48 drogersuk has joined #wam 11:44:19 claudio has joined #wam 11:45:41 Topic: Prep for URI scheme meeting with the TAG 11:48:33 [ Marcos shows preview of the slides he will present to the TAG ] 11:54:57 mpriestl has joined #wam 11:55:05 ACTION: Marcos send Widget URI scheme slides to one of {member,public}-webapps 11:55:05 Created ACTION-265 - Send Widget URI scheme slides to one of {member,public}-webapps [on Marcos Caceres - due 2008-10-27]. 11:58:27 ScribeNick timeless 11:58:38 arve has joined #wam 11:58:56 Topic: Joint meeting with TAG Members regarding Widget URI scheme 11:59:05 Present+ Dan_Connolly 11:59:12 Present+ Noah_M 11:59:22 Present+ Norm_Walsh 11:59:44 ScribeNick: timeless 11:59:45 Norm has joined #wam 12:00:28 marcos has joined #wam 12:02:12 AB: I chair this WG 12:02:21 MC: I am the Editor of this spec 12:02:53 noah has joined #wam 12:03:11 NM: member of TAG from IBM 12:03:18 NW: Norm Walsh TAG 12:03:43 Present+ Ashok Oragle, TAG 12:04:53 s/Oragle/Malhotra, Oracle/ 12:05:54 MC: [ presents slideshow "Widget URI Scheme" ] 12:05:57 DC: W3CD, member of TAG 12:06:06 s/W3CD/W3C/ 12:06:28 MC: Widget is a client side application - that runs on your computer 12:06:54 ... primarily it's a light application, written using web technologies 12:07:14 ... . Use cases include possibly embedding a widget into a web page 12:07:32 ... - similar to embedding a flash applet into a web page 12:07:47 ... - we aren't talking about Google Gadgets or Microsoft Gadgets 12:08:04 ... . Our applications are packaged, they come in a zip file, 12:08:18 ... all resources come in the file. 12:08:40 ... We've gone through a requirements gathering phaze for the past two years 12:08:52 ... OMTP has been gathering requirements for over a year. 12:08:53 kapyaho has joined #wam 12:09:07 ... We have a landscape document which is undergoing review. 12:09:22 ... And I'm also working on a Thesis describing this. 12:09:54 ... Inside zip there is a header that says that the data contained in this file entry relates to this data. 12:10:34 ... When you instantiate a widget, you need a way to tell the widget user agent that this widget 12:10:45 ... resource lives within the zip file. 12:11:01 ... The hierarchy refers to elements with-in the zip file. 12:11:10 ... The reference exists within the DOM. 12:11:45 Norm has joined #wam 12:11:50 ... We don't want the URI scheme to have the ability to reference things outside the resource. 12:12:06 ... As we want to be able to embed widgets into web pages, 12:12:52 ... we don't want them to conflict with browser handling. 12:13:00 Stefano Crosta. 12:13:01 MikeSmith has joined #wam 12:13:11 Present+ Stefano_Crosta 12:13:46 AB: We have a slide for each of the candidates 12:13:54 MC: file:... 12:14:19 ... with dashboard widgets, if you query the dom node for an image, it will expose the full path to the image 12:14:31 ... including the username. 12:15:16 ... The current specification for file is obsolete. 12:15:36 ... There is a new document which doesn't specify, but merely indicates errors in the handling. 12:16:09 ABe: Using the file uri scheme is not an option for Opera 12:16:34 ... as you can't reference a file: resource from another protocol. 12:17:06 ... This reduces the number of possible exploits. 12:17:42 MC: Mike does HTML5 specify the security boundary for http<=>file? 12:17:52 MS: I don't believe it's that specific. 12:18:11 DanC_lap has joined #wam 12:18:28 MC: cid:... 12:18:51 ArtB has changed the topic to: WebApps WG's Widgets f2f meeting 12:19:35 ... my personal opinion is that it's underspecified, especially involving encoding. 12:19:54 ... although it would be possible for widgets to specify this. 12:20:07 (cid: clearly doesn't meet the hierarchical requirement. the other arguments are much less strong) 12:20:17 Norm Walsh, aka NDW 12:20:28 Benoit has joined #wam 12:20:43 NDW: If the packaging format was still open, then i think it could be considered 12:20:52 "obscure" applies to widget: too. (as does "no standard" from the file: slide) 12:21:00 ... but if you've already accepted Zip, then I understand that it doesn't fit. 12:21:27 MC: http:... 12:21:45 ... TimBL proposed it. 12:23:58 hendry has joined #wam 12:24:05 (I wondered earlier if http://engine/widget/path was analagous to http://example.com/widgets/2007/blink-01.zip/contents/chrome/js/blink.js . indeed.) 12:24:18 Noah: do you have update scenairos. 12:24:37 ... if so, then I think you need to posit update scenarios 12:24:58 If you have update scenarios, then you need to compare how the various schemes compare in supporting them. 12:25:04 arve has joined #wam 12:25:22 If you don't need update, then I would say that the incremental cost of declining POST/PUT/DELETE in HTTP is very low. 12:25:39 q+ to observe that names and interactions are separate concerns 12:25:41 MC: Suppose we do offer HTTP, then someone might choose to implement a server which did support POST 12:25:55 stefanocrosta has joined #wam 12:26:17 Noah: Don't compare widget: to http: based on the different baselines. 12:26:24 ... only compare them against the same baseline. 12:26:26 q- 12:26:48 ABe: in practice that would lead to user agents having two implementations of http. 12:26:57 DanC 12:27:03 DanC: yes 12:27:27 User agent or server? Seems to me it's the server that declines POST/PUT/DELETE 12:27:30 (two implementations of http: in browsers is cheaper to the rest of the community than two uri schemes) 12:27:51 NDW: I assume these names are just names and that they aren't bound to other things. 12:27:57 The user agent needs to respond properly to that status code. Existing user agents will do that, one would assume. 12:28:11 (we somehow switched from evaluating proposal against requirements to pros/cons. I'll hang on to see if we get back, I guess) 12:28:23 MC: We've got no notion of origin in our widgets. 12:28:31 MC: There's no notion of authority. 12:28:47 ... if we're tweaking http too much, at what point is it no longer http? 12:29:05 Noah: tim's proposal is that the thing is on a web server. 12:30:54 Noah: there are two ways to model this 12:31:02 ... in one model there's a web server in the form of a proxy. 12:31:25 ... as long as there's some way to assign a uri to it. 12:31:57 MC: you're talking about identity. 12:32:36 JS: what happens when you die> 12:32:52 noah: that sucks< you can put that into the Cons list 12:32:55 (I gather widget: uses guids. you can stick guids in domain names, eg. 123412lkj132.noah-medelsohn.com ) 12:32:59 Present+ Henri 12:33:05 Present+ Hixie 12:33:10