<marcos> bb in 2 mins

<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

<scribe> Scribe: Art

Date: 29 January 2009

<Bryan> Bryan is here, on chat only

Review and tweak agenda

AB: any change requests?
... agenda is http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/0227.html

[None]

Announcements

AB: Andy, brief intro please

<Benoit> p

Andy: with Sony Ericsson for over 2 years;
... work with North America operators
... I work with Web technologies
... trying to get my bearings wrt to W3C

AB: Marcos mentioned in IRC today there will be Mobile Widget Workshop
... in Madrid this April as part of WWW2009.
... For details see http://www.research.att.com/~rjana/mobea2009.htm
... Deadline is Feb 12 for papers
... It's not really an announcement per se but a forward pointer to the AOB agenda item I want to talk about moving this call to one hour earlier on a permanent basis.
... does anyone have any other short announcements they'd like to make?

[None]

Requirements for Window modes:

AB: last week our discussion about window modes started to "rat hole" in that we were conflating a few different concepts
... Mark agreed to create some requirements
... Action-291: http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/291
... Mark, what is the status?

MP: I've had some internal discussions but nothing yet to share with the group
... there were some additional comments on the list and I haven't followed them yet
... will be next week before I can address this action

AB: ok; please let's continue this discussion

Arve: how does this effect P&C 1.0

MC: I'm not sure at this point
... I think we have general consensus on the names
... but we still need to discuss the related process model for each name

Arve: would we need to go back to WD or a 2nd LCWD

AB: I don't know the answer

<scribe> ACTION: barstow if we make significant changes to P&C LC, do we need to go back to WD? [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/29-wam-minutes.html#action01]

MS: there is no hard and fast rule here
... we can resolve this now
... we don't have to go back unnecessarily

AB: I think it's a bit premature to make a resolution on this
... any comments on that?

MC: I agree; we should think about this in a week or two and see how much the spec changes

AB: I think that's a reasonable way forward
... any disagreements?

[None]

Renaming "thumbnail" to "screenshot"?

AB: Marcos raised this issue via <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/0174.html>
... I don't recall much support for the proposal
... Marcos, what's the status?

MC: I think it makes sense to change it to screenshot

Arve: neither proposal is particuarly acurate description of the image

MC: what is the role of the image?

Arve: the image varies a lot
... the image is displayed to provide information

<Benoit> As a user's perspective then in gallery it would make sens to use the word screenshot

Arve: an image can have multiple roles
... OTOH, I don't think this is a big deal

MC: I'd like to go with screenshot

BS: I agree with Marcos

JK: want to understand the purpose of the image
... thumbnail is used within the device e.g. in a gallery
... that's different than an image on a web site

AB: Mark, is this topic something you will include in your input for the window mode action

MP: no, I wasn't
... see them as separate

MC: I will refine the requirements re thumbnails, etc in the Reqs doc

AB: so will you let us know when that is done?

MC: yes

SVG dependency

AB: Boris raised an issue regarding the P&C spec's SVG dependency
... See <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/0212.html>
... since then, Doug Schepers has responded
... See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/0233.html
... Marcos, what's the status?

MC: Boris' viewpoint is correct
... I was looking at it differently
... Conformance checker and author reqs are different
... Doug mentioned a bunch of different capabilities of SVG
... he recommends we recommend a subset of SVG

Arve: has anyone defined such a profile already?

MC: no and I think it would be painful to do so
... we'd have to tell authors not to use certain elements for example
... and get into spec'ing behavior diffs

AB: I think we need more information/data from implementors of the Widget UA

JK: could we use MIME type to help?

Arve: all profiles today include some features we may not want to support

AB: my recommendation is we continue to discuss this on the public mail list

MC: I think we shold drop SVG icon format for v1

Arve: I would expect some operators to require SVG icon format

AB: there's an action for everyone to talk to the impl teams and bring back some data to help inform this decision

Arve: some functionality like scripting we don't want to support
... there are other things we also don't want to have to support
... the SVG WG can help us understand if there is some way to say particualar features are not supported

<scribe> ACTION: Barstow followup with Doug and Mike to coordinate this issue with the SVG WG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/29-wam-minutes.html#action02]

Arve: I think Erik is a co-Chair

MS: we can include Cameron too as he is the other co-Chair

File extension and MIME mapping

AB: Boris raised an issue re file extensions and MIME mapping
... see <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/0173.html>
... Marcos, what's the essence of the issue?

MC: we understand this is an issue
... we can work with Hixie and at least someone else on an Internet Draft
... He thinks we need a robust table of mappings
... I think we already have such a table
... We also need to consider the security implications

<MikeSmith> http://webblaze.cs.berkeley.edu/2009/mime-sniff/mime-sniff.txt

JK: so you aren't interested in a manifest within the package to address this

MC: no widget engine has needed it so far
... thus I'm not convinced we need it
... I can put it in; just follow Apache

<MikeSmith> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff-00

MC: There is a risk of hijacking

AB: could we push this manifest to v2?

MC: yes; if it isn't on the v2 list then I will add it

AB: what's the next step then Marcos

MC: I think we need impl feedback

AB: so we could go to Candidate with the table essentially as is and see if implementors raise Red Flags?

MC: yes

Zip files and Encoding:

AB: I think the main issue is that ZIP files aren't particularly portable from OS to OS
... Marcos wrote about it in his blog: <http://datadriven.com.au/2008/12/08/zip-files-and-encoding-i-hate-you/>
... I think one of the questions for us is basically - what, if anything, we need to do about this beyond what we've already spec'ed.
... Marcos, WDYT?

MC: I don't think is going to be a huge problem
... I think developers will understand the problem and deal with it
... The only "real" solution is ZIP being standardized in some place like ISO
... I don't think we want to wait for that.

AB: comemnts?

JK: could mandate UTF-8 for filenames

Arve: yes we could mandate that but the tools that are used may not be able to support that
... I don't think we want to mandate special tools
... We have some agreed Design Goals about re-use of existing tools, specs, etc.
... We must make authoring as simple as possible

MC: I agree with the Arve's comments

AB: so we could address this by taking Jere's recommendation but it would result in some issues with authoring

JK: there could be a conformance service that helps normalize this issue
... e.g. it is used before a Widget is deployed

Arve: I don't think adding that into the process pipeline will work in practice

MC: I think the best we can do is warn authors about this and we already do that
... we recommend UTF8 but can't mandate it

API and Events spec: getting to FPWD:

AB: I submitted some comments to Arve via IRC earlier this week and I believe Arve has addressed them all
... see http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/webapps/20090127
... Arve has made additional edits <http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/>
... Arve, what's the status?

Arve: I've received a bunch of comments; thanks All!
... I think I have addressed every comment I have received
... check v1.8
... Still no Refs or Acks sections

AB: I propose we agree this document is ready for a FPWD
... any objections?

[None]

RESOLUTION: the API and Events spec is ready for FPWD

AB: thanks Arve and Marcos
... ACTION: barstow submit paperwork to publish FPWD of APIs and Events spec

Proposal to change VC time to one hour earlier

AB: changing the VC time is always a tough issue because there is no real win-win here all of our world wide participants.
... nevertheless, are there any objections to moving the VC time to one hour earlier?

<Bryan> One hour earlier conflicts with UWA

AB: Bryan, that is a real bummer

<Bryan> It's a problem for me, but I guess I can switch off

AB: Bryan, what does "switch off" mean?

<Bryan> Alternate

AB: Bryan, do you object to this proposal?

<Bryan> No, just fyi

RESOLUTION: the new voice conference time moving forward will be one hour earlier

AB: any other biz?

MC: I will not be on next week's call

AB: good luck next week with your PhD defense!

Benoit: any comments on the f2f document?
... http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/images/3/3f/OrangeLab-Issy-venue.pdf
... any changes in attendance?

AB: Arve changed to "likely"

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)

Found ScribeNick: ArtB
Found Scribe: Art
Default Present: Jere
Present: Art Arve Andy Jere Mark Bryan Marcos Benoit Mike
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/0227.html
Found Date: 29 Jan 2009
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/01/29-wam-minutes.html
People with action items: barstow changes doug followup if make mike significant we with