Widgets Voice Conference

03 Sep 2009


See also: IRC log


Marcin, Art, Marcos, Arve, Steven, Bryan, Benoit
Robin, AndyB, Frederick




<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

<scribe> Scribe: Art

Date 3 September 2009

Review and tweak agenda

AB: the draft agenda was posted on September 2 ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0935.html ). I propose adding View Modes before AOB. Any objections to that?
... any change requests?

[ None ]


AB: Reminders on upcoming deadlines: 1) Sep 14 is deadline to register for Widgets Testing event ( http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TestWorkshop2009 ); 2) Sep 15 comment deadline for APIs and Events LCWD; 3) Sep 20 comment deadline for WARP LCWD
... Does anyone have any other short announcements?

[ None ]

P&C spec: comments from PFWG

AB: on August 27, WAI's Protocols and Formats WG submitted comments against the P&C LCWD ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0843.html ). Although these comments are late, we should still respond to them. Note these comments have been added to the P&C post-LCWD comment tracker ( http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/Widgets/PandC-LCWD-28May2009 ).
... Marcos, have you had a chance to review these?

MC: just briefly
... most related to Conformance Checker

AB: let's make sure we respond

MC: OK, will do

<scribe> ACTION: caceres respond to PFWG's comments on the P+C LCWD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/03-wam-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-399 - Respond to PFWG's comments on the P+C LCWD [on Marcos Caceres - due 2009-09-10].

AB: ok thanks Marcos; I don't consider this urgent

<arve> sorry for late IRC arrival

P&C spec: IRI/URI normalization

AB: this topic is continued from our 27 August Voice Conf ( http://www.w3.org/2009/08/27-wam-minutes.html#item03 ). Has anyone received feedback from the I18N WG on this issue ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0644.html )?
... I checked their public mail list and it appears they did not meet on Sept 2
... but I don't know if they meet weekly or not

MH: they meet later in the day, Europe time

AB: Marcos, Marcin - have you received any feedback from them?

MC: no

MH: no

AB: OK, I'll ping Addison

<scribe> ACTION: barstow follow-up with Addisson and Richard and I18N Core WG re the URI/IRI normalization issue for the P+C spec [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/03-wam-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-400 - Follow-up with Addisson and Richard and I18N Core WG re the URI/IRI normalization issue for the P+C spec [on Arthur Barstow - due 2009-09-10].

AB: anything else on that topic today?

[ No ]

P&C spec: Conformance Checker (CC) requirements

AB: on IRC yesterday, Marcos raised the question "What are we going to do if no one implements the Conformance Checker (CC) requirements?".

MC: a question is how to we progress the spec if no one implements the CC reqs
... we could make a call for implemenations
... and try to get a commitment
... Robin indicated in IRC that he could do an impl
... but I think we want "commericially viable" impls
... we need impls beyond academic proof of concepts

AB: what is the status from the MWTS WG on this?

MC: I don't have a update
... they did a "quick-and-dirty" impl
... as part of their validation service
... an add on to that service would be good

AB: is anyone willing to extend what MWTS has done to meet our reqs?

[ No ]

AB: I guess at this point, all we can say is that at the end of CR we may have some testable assertions for which there is no impl
... perhaps we will be OK if we have test cases and 2 or more impls for the P+C UA product

<Marcos> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/tests/

AB: even though we may not have impls for the CC product

MC: my priority at the moment is the P+C UA product
... we will probably have about 200 tests

AB: anything else on testing Marcos?

MC: I am having some issues with CVS

MH: I was having a similar issue a few weeks ago
... Kai and Dom can help here

MC: OK; I'll try that

AB: Marcos, if you continue to have problems let me know

MC: looking back, we should have built the test suite during Last Call and not wait until CR
... before we progress any other spec to CR, we should do real work on the test suite
... especially for Widgets Interface and WARP specs
... as well as Widgets URI spec

AB: that seems like a good idea to me

Introduction by Steven Pemberton

AB: Steven, thanks for joining us!

SP: I am based in Amsterdam
... been involved with XHMTL, HTML, XForms, CSS, etc.
... involved with two WGs and some various Task Forces
... I was asked to help with this group but my time is limited

AB: OK; thanks for joining and we look forward to having your expertise to help us!

widget Interface spec: storage

AB: last week we discussed Scott Wilson's thread ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0783.html ) related to the Web Storage spec ( http://dev.w3.org/html5/webstorage/ ). Marcos, during our 27 August call you indicated ( http://www.w3.org/2009/08/27-wam-minutes.html#item06 ) you were going to send a response to Scott.

MC: I haven't completed that yet
... but I will respond before the end of the week

AB: anything else on this topic?
... a new WD of the Web Storage WD should be published next week
... we need that spec to continue given our dependency on it

WARP spec: LC comments from Marcin Hanclik

AB: on August 27, Marcin submitted comments ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0844.html ) for the WARP LCWD. We want detailed discussions to occur on public-webapps but let's take some time now to let Marcin summarize his proposed changes.

MH: the access element and its syntax and semantics
... it would be changed to be based on the feature element
... I propose some syntax changes
... the subdomain attr is problematic e.g. doesn't support more protocols
... the uri attr is also a prob
... e.g. the value "*" is too loose
... I propose we move from the access element to the feature element
... Need to support other protocols beyond http e.g. tel:, sms:, etc.

MC: we also thought about enabling network via the feature element
... but we think using access element simplifies the model a bit
... Doing it all via feature is a bit convoluted
... The sec policy will permit or not stuff like tel:
... The feature stuff should eventually go away as things get included by the UA; that they will be there by default
... I see some value in Marcin's proposal but I prefer the current model
... Want to hear more feedback from the WG

MH: we need to define security and policy
... and that is the scope of the DAP WG
... don't think WARP should define security model or policy
... there are several use cases we need to consider against warp e.g. mailto:

MC: I think we should take this up on the mail list

MH: I'm OK with that
... please answer my e-mail

MC: I will but after I take care of some P+C issues
... I do think we think about whether WARP is too over-reaching
... and I also agree we may need to discuss this with DAP

MH: should we Cc: DAP WG?

MC: I don't think so; I suspect WARP will end up going back to WD

AB: further discussions should continue on public-webapps
... the deadline for comments for WARP LC is 20 September
... are there related discussion in BONDI about WARP?

MH: yes
... BONDI has an access requirement
... we need something like WARP
... but we access to be done via features
... we defined an element that similar to WARP's <access> but it is different
... BONDI wants to be based on W3C spec

AB: any last comments on this topic?

Widget URIs spec: proposal to publish LCWD

AB: on September 2 Robin completed his action to get the Widget URIs spec ready for LCWD ( http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/waf/widgets-uri/ ). By publishing a LCWD we are stating the spec is functionally complete and meets all of the relevant requirements. Are there any objections to publishing this document as LCWD?

MC: I have reservations
... I sent a bunch of feedback about one hour ago

AB: I haven't looked at it

MC: the spec meets the relevant reqs
... but it doesn't define everything that it should
... it also doesn't have a Conformance section
... and doesn't define a "product"
... I think Robin should fix the problems I found before we publish it
... If he fixes the issues I raised, I think we would have a better LCWD document

AB: what do others think?
... Do we wait until Robin addresses MC's concerns or publish as is?

MC: I think we should fix the problems first

MH: I need to review MC's comments
... if Robin can fix MC's comments RS that would be good

Bryan: I support that as well

AB: you mean you want MC's comments addressed first?

Bryan: yes

AB: I'm hearing the majority of people want to postpone publication until Robin has addressed MC's comments
... so that's what we will do
... anything else on this topic for today?

[ No ]

View Modes spec: status

AB: Marcin, what is the status of the View Modes spec ( http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/waf/widgets-vm/ ). Has the spec been split?

MH: the spec isn't split yet but I intend to do the split by the end of the week

AB: excellent
... any other status to report?

MH: not today

AB: anyone else have something for this topic?

[ No ]


MH: regarding TPAC
... can attend as a group participant
... or as an Observer
... the UI of the registration form doesn't permit a person to register as a participant for two WGs on the same day

Bryan: I have the same issue

AB: I'll raise this issue with our Team Contacts

Benoit: WebApps will have two rooms, right?

AB: yes
... any other AOB items?
... Next meeting: next week, same logistics. This meeting is adjourned.

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: barstow follow-up with Addisson and Richard and I18N Core WG re the URI/IRI normalization issue for the P+C spec [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/03-wam-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: caceres respond to PFWG's comments on the P+C LCWD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/03-wam-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.135 (CVS log)
$Date: 2009/09/03 13:59:32 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/BS: I have/Bryan: I have/
Found ScribeNick: ArtB
Found Scribe: Art
Present: Marcin Art Marcos Arve Steven Bryan Benoit
Regrets: Robin AndyB Frederick
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0935.html
Got date from IRC log name: 03 Sep 2009
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/09/03-wam-minutes.html
People with action items: barstow caceres respond

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]