W3C

- DRAFT -

Web Applications Working Group Teleconference

18 Dec 2008

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Art, Claudio, Benoit, Jere, Mike, Marcos, Mark, Thomas
Regrets
Arve
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art

Contents


 

 

<trackbot> Date: 18 December 2008

<MikeSmith> Meeting: Widgets weekly telcon

<MikeSmith> oh ArtB, we never did get that meeting time set up, huh?

<MikeSmith> I mean, added to Zakim's list?

<MikeSmith> ArtB: trackbot makes the logs public automatically

<MikeSmith> if we do trackbot, start meeting

<scribe> Scribe: Art

<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

<marcos> sorry

<marcos> dialing in

<scribe> Meeting: Widgets Voice Conference

Presnet+ Mark

Agenda review and tweaking

AB: agenda is http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2008OctDec/0505.html
... any change requests?

CV: how about a short summary of the Security Workshop Dec 10-11

AB: good idea; will add it to AOB
... any other change reqs?

[None]

Announcements

AB: this is the last VC in 2008
... any other annoucements?

[None]

P&C spec and Last Call

AB: http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-reqs/
... Marcos, please summarize changes since Dec 11 CfC

MC: some changes in Section 8
... Still a few holes I need to patch today

<tlr> huh? widgets call on for today?

MC: Josh has provided some good feedback
... I think we can put in a reqest today

AB: primarily editorial changes still need to be made?

MC: yes
... some spelling checks and related tidying

AB: please describe the Window Mode change you made today

MC: no one has submitted any inputs for Window Mode
... Consequently, I added a warning to the spec

<marcos> Warning: Feature at risk! This spec does not define the semantics of the window modes. We seek input regarding - what, if anything, should be specified in this spec versus what should be left as an imple detail. The widget element's mode attribute and associated window modes will be dropped without substantial evidence that they are needed.

MC: And a request for feedbback

AB: please read this new text
... any issues with this proposed text

MP: we think defining modes in P&C spec
... we will submit input as part of the review process

BS: I agree with MP

CV: my recollection from last f2f meeting is that for v1 we would go with minimal mode

MC: yes, but we never got any UCs or behaviour descriptions
... We also don't have a related requirement

BS: so you want both a requirement and a proposal?

MC: yes, that's correct

AB: any other comments on the proposed Warning text?

CV: what level of detail do you want for the requirment?

MC: same level as we have in the Requirements doc

CV: I think we need something like iconized, full screen, floating

<Benoit> do we need to include all existing modes already?

AB: perhaps we should add a request for Use Cases and Requirements to the new warning text

MC: the various WUAs support different modes

AB: sorry to interrupt but I want to postpone deep dive discussion on this topic
... What we need are specific: Use Cases, Requirements and prescriptive text
... That should be sent to the public mail list for discussion
... For the purposes of this meeting, we want to discuss if this doc is ready for LC or not

BS: I want to understand what inputs can be relfected today

MC: any substantial inputs should be sent after the review period begins

JK: I just sent you the biblio info

AB: I agree with Marcos
... any other comments
... I propose we publish a LCWD of the P&C spec
... any objections?

MP: how long will the LC review period be?

AB: it will end January 31
... any concerns about the Jan 31 date?
... it will give us 3 weeks before we have our next f2f

BS: I suspect we will have more than one LC, right?

AB: If we get substantial input on any part of the spec, a 2nd LC is likely
... any support to publish a LC?

MC: I support

BS: abstain

JK: I support

MP: VF supports it

CV: we support it

RESOLUTION: we will publish a LCWD of the P&C spec

DigSig Spec

AB: questions for the XML Sec WG
... Mark closed this today, right?

MP: yes; I submitted a response today
... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2008OctDec/0513.html

AB: any other comments?

[]None]

Next F2F Meeting for Widgets group

AB: proposal is Feb 24-26 in Paris hosted by Benoit in Orange
... any concerns about that date?

MP: I may have to leave early on the 26th but otherwise that's fine

AB: we have an obligation to annouce f2f meetings 8 weeks in advance

JK: do you have an agenda?

AB: yes; skeleton at http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/WidgetsParisAgenda
... I think we'll have plenty to talk about
... are there any objections to the f2f during those dates and in that location?

[None]

AB: I will make an annoucement shortly

AOB

AB: next Voice Conf is January 8
... regarding holidays, I'll be offline starting Dec 22 and return on Jan 5

BS: I may have some conflicts on Jan 8 and Jan 15 but will try to join

AB: regarding Security Workshop
... the Team will create a Workshop Report and that will be available in January
... there was consensus to start two new blocks of work at W3C
... 1. is Device APIs i.e. JavaScript bindings to services such as contacts, PIM
... 2. Security Model
... there was some discussion about whether these work items could be done by WebApps or a new WG
... WebApps seems to have a pretty full plate already
... Mark, Marcos, anything to add?

MC: I don't ahve anything to add

MP: there were discussions about user interaction and how to present security info to the user
... in a usefule way
... especially on mobiles
... Lots of good discussions

CV: thanks for those summaries
... what about managing APIs in terms of a framework?
... or was it more about vertical APIs?

MC: regarding a framework, I proposed the one we are already specifying e.g. via the <feature> element

CV: is this going to be UWA v2 or Geolocation API replication?

MC: I don't think there will be any replication of work
... Nokia said they will submit their APIs

TR: I think this isn't clear
... another topic is web apps versus widgets
... whatever is done for widgets should apply for web apps in general

<tlr> ... and with that, happy holidays ;-)

TR: This could be something we need to consider in the context of the widget: scheme discussions

AB: thanks very much Marcos for the great work you've done on the P&C spec

[Lots of thanks for Marcos]

AB: Meeting Adjourned

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2008/12/18 15:52:41 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133  of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/Fo the/For the/
Found Scribe: Art
Found ScribeNick: ArtB
Default Present: Mike, Art_Barstow, +358.503.85aaaa, JereK, Claudio, Benoit, +44.771.751.aabb, marcos, Mark, Thomas
Present: Art Claudio Benoit Jere Mike Marcos Mark Thomas
Regrets: Arve
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2008OctDec/0505.html
Found Date: 18 Dec 2008
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/12/18-wam-minutes.html
People with action items: 

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]