See also: IRC log
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
Date: 24 September 2009
AB: draft agenda was posted on Sep 23 ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/1199.html ). During the widget Interface topic we will record the recent exchanges between Marcos and Marcin as well as the origin thread from Scott Wilson as a way of capturing ongoing discussions but we won't deep dive on them given Marcos will not be here today.
Arve: since Marcin and Marcos aren't here, we should probably drop the VM-I spec today
... so given all of the Regrets, we will have a short call today
AB: any short annoucements?
[ None ]
AB: a widget testing event was
held Sep 21-23 ( http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TestWorkshop2009
). Does anyone have a summary or news they can share?
... since none of the event's participants are here today, we'll skip this
AB: Marcin and Marcos continue to
discuss this thread (
... Marcin and Marcos continue to discuss this thread ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/1208.html ).
... the last email in this thread is from Scott ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/1220.html ). One question here is "origin of a widget" versus "instance of widget".
... given Marcos isn't here today, we will drop this now but please continue to discuss this on public-webapps
AB: Dom proposed ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/1202.html ) the <access> element's uri attribute be changed to "urlpattern" citing some related work done by the POWDER WG. Any comments?
Arve: I'm unsure
... technically, he's probably right
... I agree it describes a URL pattern
... but I am skeptical to this change
AB: given Marcin isn't here today, we will drop this now but please reply to this proposal on public-webapps
JK: Dom had another suggestion
and that was just "pattern"
... I prefer pattern to urlpattern
Arve: let's take this to the mail
... I need to do some investigation as I can't reach the POWDER document right now
AB: without Robin here today, we'll skip this for today
AB: last week we agreed that
today we consider if the VM-MF spec was ready for FPWD (
). Marcin responded earlier today (
) that he votes for FPWD.
... since then, Robin submitted some comment ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/1254.html ). Robin, are any of these mandatory before FPWD publication?
... I think we need to defer the question is this doc ready for FPWD
... any comments or concerns about that?
Arve: I don't think we should go to FPWD until we have a chance to hear from others
AB: anything else on this topic for today?
AB: any other topics for today?
[ None ]
AB: next meeting is October
... meeting adjourned
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) Found ScribeNick: ArtB Found Scribe: Art Present: Arve Jere AndyB Frederick Art Steven Benoit Regrets: Josh Marcin Marcos Robin Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/1199.html Found Date: 24 Sep 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/09/24-wam-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]