13:00:12 RRSAgent has joined #wam 13:00:12 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/08/13-wam-irc 13:00:21 ScribeNick: ArtB 13:00:24 Scribe: Art 13:00:26 + +49.208.4.aaaa 13:00:26 Chair: Art 13:00:40 Present: Marcin, Art 13:00:47 zakim, what's the passcode? 13:00:47 the conference code is 9231 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Marcos_ 13:00:48 Regrets: Frederick 13:00:59 Title: Widgets Voice Conf 13:01:05 Date: 13 August 2009 13:01:16 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0574.html 13:01:20 RRSAgent, make log Public 13:01:52 RRSAgent, make minutes 13:01:52 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/08/13-wam-minutes.html ArtB 13:02:04 + +47.23.69.aabb 13:02:12 Present+ Marcos, Arve 13:02:32 arve_ has joined #wam 13:03:16 Bryan has joined #wam 13:03:31 Present+ Bryan 13:03:59 +Bryan_Sullivan 13:05:06 Topic: Review and tweak agenda 13:05:14 AB: draft agenda ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0574.html ) posted 12 August. Any change requests? 13:05:20 Present+ Josh 13:05:27 [ None ] 13:05:35 Topic: Announcements 13:05:41 AB: any short announcements? 13:05:48 [ None ] 13:06:11 Topic: A&E spec: proposal to publish LCWD 13:06:20 AB: during our last call on July 30 we said that today we would determine if there was consensus to publish a LCWD of the A&E spec ( http://www.w3.org/2009/07/30-wam-minutes.html#item03 ). What is the status Marcos? Latest ED is: http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/ 13:07:21 AB: is July 30 the latest? 13:07:23 MC: yes 13:07:36 AB: MC, you have an issue about the A+E? 13:07:44 MC: yes; showNotifcation 13:07:55 ... do we want this in a new spec? 13:08:03 ... some discussion on WHAT-WG list 13:08:21 ... some want showNotification in its own spec 13:08:48 Arve: I think it should be place in its own spec 13:08:59 ... since it is not related to widget packaing 13:09:06 ... would be a good separation of concerns 13:09:16 ... not clear if it belongs in HTML5 or not 13:09:25 ... but tend to think a sep spec is best 13:09:43 MH: what about getAttention? 13:09:51 MC: they could be merged into one spec 13:10:04 Arve: disagree; diff use cases for the two 13:10:19 ... but could specify both APIs in the same spec 13:10:51 MH: BONDI module UI 13:11:11 ... handles softkeys, vibration, etc. 13:11:29 ... think showNot and getAttention should be defined together 13:11:57 BS: getAttention not covered 13:12:11 ... good question about where to put UI functions 13:12:27 ... I do agree try to minimize the number of specs 13:12:42 MC: so BS, should these UI APIs be removed from A+E? 13:12:55 BS: should be consistent with other specs 13:13:19 ... if no other UI APis in the widget spec suite it may make sense to put them in a sep spec 13:14:21 AB: I don't feel strongly about keeping them or removing these two UI APIs 13:14:30 Arve: I feel strongly they should be in a separate spec 13:14:50 MC: they prolly shouldn't have been there to begin with 13:15:13 ... think there should be a stand alone spec for these UI-related APIs 13:16:18 AB: a concern I have is who will drive these two APIs fwd 13:16:33 MC: we can ask Hixie to put them back in HTML5 13:17:50 BS: could get DAP involved 13:19:14 AB: I'm hearing these APIs are of broad enough interest to separate them from the A+E spec and the widget spec suite 13:19:36 BS: but it is still within scope for WebApps, right? 13:19:39 AB: yes 13:20:50 AB: I don't want these APIs to ping back and forth with the HTML WG 13:21:01 ... want an Editor that is committed to driving them 13:21:47 MC: we took HTML5 as a basis and then started adding widget stuff on top of it 13:22:15 Arve: I understand one UC from Google is to use this with Worker Threads 13:22:26 MC: yes; so they have some different reqs 13:22:41 Arve: yes; non-trivial to address a broad set of reqs 13:22:53 s/worker threads/background workers/ 13:23:02 [this is even more complicated] 13:23:07 BS: I think the UI part of DAP is related 13:24:05 MC: since these APIs were removed from HTML5, a lot of the landscape has changed 13:24:21 ... there may now be enough interest for HTML5 to take these back 13:26:04 AB: one way fwd is to remove them and ask HTML WG to take them back 13:26:24 ... if HTML WG doesn't want them, we will need to find someone in WebApps 13:26:39 ... or possibly DAP WG 13:26:58 Arve: I don't think DAP is right, but WebApps is OK if HTML WG doesn't want them 13:27:15 BS: I have some concerns about them going to HTML5 13:27:25 ... related to timing and complexity 13:27:42 ... not sure they will address widgets reqs 13:28:15 BS: so an issue is where are the experts and the resources? 13:28:30 MC: yes; but HTML5 plans to go to LC in a month or two 13:28:53 AB: does anyone object to removing these two APIs from A+E? 13:28:56 [ None ] 13:29:28 RESOLUTION: the showNotification and getAttention APIs will be removed from the A+E spec 13:30:03 AB: MC or Arve, can you take an Action to talk to Hixie about HTML taking these two functions? 13:30:05 MC: yes 13:30:32 ACTION: caceres talk to Hixie and HTML WG about taking the getAttention and showNotification APIs 13:30:33 Created ACTION-389 - Talk to Hixie and HTML WG about taking the getAttention and showNotification APIs [on Marcos Caceres - due 2009-08-20]. 13:31:17 AB: are there any other issues blocking a LCWD of A+E? 13:31:21 MC: no 13:31:29 ... I will remove these two APIs 13:32:10 Arve: I have a comment about openURI 13:32:34 ... the method is about opening a Locator not an Identifier 13:32:53 MC: I want to imply any URI can be loaded 13:33:10 Arve: all URLs are URI 13:33:18 ... but not vice-versa 13:33:51 MC: look at the examples: sms: tel: feed: ... 13:34:21 MH: need to have consistency 13:34:32 ... URI, URL, IRI, ... 13:34:46 MC: can't use "IRI" because that is "W3C Speak" 13:35:01 MH: but the description needs to be consistent 13:35:13 s/openURI/open/ 13:35:18 s/widget/window/ 13:35:24 MC: I can live with URL but I don't like it 13:35:47 AB: is there a precedence we should consider? 13:36:02 MC: at least 3 other widget engines use openURL 13:36:23 AB: my preference is to use openURL 13:36:38 ... can you live with it MC? 13:36:44 MC: yes; I'll change it 13:37:23 AB: why is license not included? 13:37:56 MC: I don't feel strongly about it 13:38:07 AB: seems like it should be there for completness 13:38:41 MC: I could add it; could also add license HREF 13:38:45 readonly attribute DOMString license; 13:38:45 readonly attribute DOMString licenseHref; 13:40:37 MC: the licenseHref can have some probs 13:40:51 Arve: could also have multiple licenses 13:41:04 MC: yes; not clear which would be authoritative 13:41:19 what about readonly attribute LicenseCollection license; 13:42:20 Arve: would prefer to not handle license at all for API and Events 13:42:45 ... could define formal grammar for licenses 13:42:53 AB: I don't want to go down that rathole 13:44:04 AB: one option is to leave License out of the spec and to see if there are any objections during the LC review period 13:44:15 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0614.html 13:46:30 AB: my inclination is to leave the spec as is ; OK? 13:46:32 MC: yes 13:47:08 AB: are there any objections to publishing a LCWD of the A+E spec with the agreed changes today? 13:47:12 [ None ] 13:47:43 RESOLUTION: the WG agrees to publish a LCWD of the A+E with the changes agreed during the 13 Aug 2009 Voice Conf 13:48:02 ACTION: Caceres notify Art when A+E LCWD is pub ready 13:48:02 Created ACTION-390 - Notify Art when A+E LCWD is pub ready [on Marcos Caceres - due 2009-08-20]. 13:48:38 Topic: P&C: Test suite dependency on A&E spec 13:48:48 AB: first P&C topic is the question about whether or not the P&C test suite can have a dependency on the APIs and Events spec ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0522.html ). Marcos and Scott Wilson exchanged some emails on this. Marcos? 13:50:00 MC: there is a tradeoff between having a simpler test suite for the P+C spec if the test suite can use the A+E spec 13:50:32 ... don't want to have to add a bunch of extra steps for simple things 13:52:24 AB: I don't see a problem with such a dependency 13:52:53 AB: what do you need Marcos, a resolution? 13:52:53 http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/Overview_TSE.src.html 13:54:04 MC: I am working with Kai on the templates 13:54:13 ... we now have about 80 tests 13:54:58 AB: are these templates all new? 13:55:07 MC: yes; did them very recently 13:55:20 ... I have been working with the MWTS on this 13:55:40 ... there are 114 testable assertions 13:55:50 ... we will create one or more tests for each assertion 13:56:03 ... this helps us understand if assertions are testable or not 13:56:16 http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/tests/test-suite.xml 13:57:29 AB: this looks real good Marcos! 13:58:26 MC: I think this is going to work quite well 13:58:34 ... it will also help us find issues in the spec 13:59:37 MC: I want to talk about how to track bugs 13:59:43 ... Marcin found a bug too 14:01:08 AB: what is the status of Kai's prior work? 14:01:15 I have to drop for another call. I sent a mail closing ACTION-357. 14:01:27 -Bryan_Sullivan 14:01:33 MC: he is updating those tests to use the new template 14:01:43 http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/tests/ 14:01:59 ... they will be moved into our CVS repository 14:02:25 Topic: P&C: Candidate "Bug Alerts" 14:02:34 AB: Opera has submitted three "Bug Alerts" against the P&C Candidate and each of these has been captured as Raised Issues ( http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues ). Let's go through these quickly and at a minimum determine if there is an issue or not. 14:04:37 AB: I want to postpone process related discussions until we have a Team Member on the call 14:05:03 Topic: Issue #93: deprecated, grandfathered, and redundant tags should be skipped. 14:05:15 AB: Issue #93 ( http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/93 ). The original email is ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0452.html ). 14:05:43 MC: this is definitely a bug 14:07:07 AB: one question I have is why deprecated subtags should be ignored 14:07:19 i-hello 14:07:27 "i, hello" 14:07:39 "/i" 14:10:06 AB: there a bunch of subtags that begin with "x" 14:10:14 ... dozens were added 29 July 2009 14:10:21 ... do you mean "x-..."? 14:10:27 x- 14:10:34 MC: yes, I mean "x-" 14:11:37 AB: I'm not convinced we have a serious bug here 14:11:51 MC: agree; we do have some redundancies we need to address 14:12:20 AB: my recommendation is to move from RAISED to OPEN 14:12:33 ... and during impl phase we need to get feedback from the implementors 14:12:35 ... OK? 14:12:37 MC: yes 14:12:52 ACTION: barstow move Issue #93 to OPEN state 14:12:52 Created ACTION-391 - Move Issue #93 to OPEN state [on Arthur Barstow - due 2009-08-20]. 14:13:08 AB: anything else on #93? 14:13:10 [ No ] 14:13:11 Topic: Issue #94: Try to fallback to default start files when src path is invalid or not existing 14:13:17 AB: Issue #94 ( http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/94 ). The original email is ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0453.html 14:13:39 AB: you want to withdraw this one Marcos? 14:13:41 MC: yes 14:14:02 AB: so we should close this as not an issue? 14:14:06 MC: yes; and Josh agreed 14:14:16 AB: any objections to closing this? 14:14:19 [ None ] 14:14:37 ACTION: barstow close Issue #94 - this is not an Issue - it is a Feature! 14:14:37 Created ACTION-392 - Close Issue #94 - this is not an Issue - it is a Feature! [on Arthur Barstow - due 2009-08-20]. 14:14:45 Topic: Issue #95: Conformance checker behavior intermixed with UA behavior 14:14:51 AB: Issue #95 ( http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/95 ). The original email is ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0552.html ) 14:15:52 MC: want to reject features of ZIP that are not universally supported 14:16:36 ... want to remove this to allow future UAs to still work 14:16:48 ... so its a bit of future proofing 14:17:18 ... then a CC could warn the author about such features 14:17:47 AB: I agree it is a bug 14:18:19 ... and would keep it open for now 14:18:38 MC: don't want the UA to be a CC 14:18:46 AB: I agree that isn't good 14:19:35 AB: so you indeed want to remove that quoted sentence from the spec, right? 14:19:37 MC: yes 14:20:11 AB: my proposal is to move to Open state and ask implementors for feedback 14:20:21 MH: no comments now on this 14:20:31 AB: any objections to my proposal? 14:20:34 [ None ] 14:20:50 ACTION: barstow move issue #95 to the Open state 14:20:51 Created ACTION-393 - Move issue #95 to the Open state [on Arthur Barstow - due 2009-08-20]. 14:21:48 AB: anything else about the P+C for today? 14:21:51 [ No ] 14:21:57 Topic: View Modes spec 14:22:03 AB: we still don't have a FPWD of the View Modes spec despite the P&C CR defining the list of modes ( http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/waf/widgets-wm/ ). On July 15 Robin published a ToDo list ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0218.html ). 14:22:25 AB: We also discussed this spec on July 30 ( http://www.w3.org/2009/07/30-wam-minutes.html#item05 ) and clarified that Marcin can edit this spec as needed. What's the status and in particular, what remains to be done before we can publish the FPWD? 14:23:03 AB: I think we need to make this spec a High Priority 14:23:28 MH: I will update the spec this week or next 14:23:40 AB: OK 14:24:15 AB: let us know if you need help 14:24:19 MH: will do 14:24:32 AB: anything else on View Modes spec for today? 14:24:43 [ None ] 14:24:49 Topic: AOB 14:25:00 AB: I don't have anything for today 14:25:06 ... anyone else? 14:25:09 [ No ] 14:25:16 AB: Meeting Adjourned 14:25:35 - +49.208.4.aaaa 14:25:36 - +47.23.69.aabb 14:25:37 -Art_Barstow 14:25:42 RRSAgent, make minutes 14:25:42 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/08/13-wam-minutes.html ArtB 14:25:43 -Josh_Soref 14:25:44 IA_WebApps(Widgets)9:00AM has ended 14:25:48 Attendees were Josh_Soref, Art_Barstow, +49.208.4.aaaa, +47.23.69.aabb, Bryan_Sullivan 14:26:40 Marcos has joined #wam 14:26:52 Marcos_ has joined #wam 14:26:56 Meeting: Widgets Voice Conference 14:27:01 RRSAgent, make minutes 14:27:01 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/08/13-wam-minutes.html ArtB 14:28:33 zakim, bye 14:28:33 Zakim has left #wam 14:28:38 rrsagent, bye 14:28:38 I see 5 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/13-wam-actions.rdf : 14:28:38 ACTION: caceres talk to Hixie and HTML WG about taking the getAttention and showNotification APIs [1] 14:28:38 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/13-wam-irc#T13-30-32 14:28:38 ACTION: Caceres notify Art when A+E LCWD is pub ready [2] 14:28:38 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/13-wam-irc#T13-48-02 14:28:38 ACTION: barstow move Issue #93 to OPEN state [3] 14:28:38 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/13-wam-irc#T14-12-52 14:28:38 ACTION: barstow close Issue #94 - this is not an Issue - it is a Feature! [4] 14:28:38 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/13-wam-irc#T14-14-37 14:28:38 ACTION: barstow move issue #95 to the Open state [5] 14:28:38 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/13-wam-irc#T14-20-50