See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 30 September 2009
<darobin> crap, I'm still an hour early!
<darobin> yes, clearly PEBCAK in this case
<darobin> but last week I was fine and made exactly the same mistake
<darobin> so let's not presume that it's affecting my abilities in any way :)
<darobin> this is weird, I don't show up!
<darobin> JereK, you would make a great scribe!
<darobin> Scribe: Jere
<darobin> ScribeNick: JereK
<brianleroux> will not be able to call in due to family noise pollution / hope thats ok =)
<fhirsch> dial in questionnaire
fhirsch: TPAC coming up, please register and fill in phone-in questionnaire
<fhirsch> reminder about tpac
<dom> [note that the number of hotel rooms blocked for TPAC is going down rapidly]
<AnssiK> should people who will be attending f2f submit the questionnaire?
fhirsch: DAP meeting as originally scheduled
fhirsch: minutes sent out yesterday, approval?
RESOLUTION: minutes of Sep 29 approved
fhirsch: one other person wanted to join editorial team?
fhirsch: need to join W3C first,
all help welcome
... need to talk with Dom or tlr first
fhirsch: should move actions to
... when completed, please send mail to list to let ppl know what you've done
... helps with follow-up
fhirsch: some open action items
remain, discussion about possible additional material
... some decisions we have to make
fhirsch: looked at high-level
material of the inputs
... someone from BONDI please give info about 1.01
... e-mail summarizes points so far, but doesn't cover everything
... one of the big ones is do we need both capabilities for both APIs and device
<drogersuk> I'll give you some more info on the diffs between 1.01 and 1.0 via email
<drogersuk> (for BONDI)
fhirsch: don't know if it's issue
for WG, but want discussion on the mailing list
... reading items from list quickly
... bunch of Qs about identification, would like to see a mail thread started about it
... language independence
... use XML for policy, worth discussion
... thread about separate policy decision exists
... can someone take an action to summarize HTML5 security policy?
... need actions to move things forward
... thanks David for the diff information, any more detail would be useful
<darobin> ACTION: David to provide diffs for the BONDI versions [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/30-dap-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-22 - Provide diffs for the BONDI versions [on David Rogers - due 2009-10-07].
<paddy> I can start a discussion on features/device capabilities
fhirsch: now would be a good time to discuss
<drogersuk> can't hear a thing
<darobin> ACTION: Paddy to open an issue and start a discussion on features/device capabilities [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/30-dap-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-23 - Open an issue and start a discussion on features/device capabilities [on Paddy Byers - due 2009-10-07].
fhirsch: link to TAG discussion
regarding policy sent by Robin
... has been a big issue in Geolocation, concerns retaining information
... anybody in the position to take actions related to policy?
darobin: Paddy took an action about features/device capabilities
<fhirsch> need help with identifying APIs, Capabilities, FEaturews by URI
fhirsch: maybe also related WebIDL stuff
darobin: no WebIDL stuff in this, not in terms of URIs
fhirsch: could use help with this
darobin: should probably open this as an issue, what levels of granularity for identification
fhirsch: granularity of access
... need to talk this through on the list, more than one person can do this
... get stuff done and see what's wrong with it
... can go quicker if we have something to disagree
StephenLewontin: volunteer to help with the HTML5 security
<dom> ACTION: Stephen to look into HTML5 security model [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/30-dap-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-24 - Look into HTML5 security model [on stephen lewontin - due 2009-10-07].
SteveLewontin: need any
requirements for capability semantics?
... how are those defined, just recommendations?
fhirsch: clearly have to say what we mean
<fhirsch> issue: policy, need to define semantics of capabilities or not
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-24 - Policy, need to define semantics of capabilities or not ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/24/edit .
SteveLewontin: will put this in writing, need to make a decision about the semantics of capabilities
<dom> ACTION-24 due in two weeks
<trackbot> ACTION-24 Look into HTML5 security model due date now in two weeks
SteveLewontin: will make an effort to do the action in two weeks
marcin: currently discussions in
BONDI around features and capabilities for 1.1
... white paper to highlight topics in progress
... needs some additions due to recent input, could use it as input for this in DAP
... doable by next week's call
<dom> ACTION: marcin to provide BONDI white paper on features and capabilities [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/30-dap-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-25 - Provide BONDI white paper on features and capabilities [on Marcin Hanclik - due 2009-10-07].
fhirsch: thanks Marcin
... back to the list
... another big one is trusted identity and trust
... don't want PKI, but need to see how far to go in this direction
... don't think there's any disagremeent in separating policy, the BONDI ones are straightforward
... would be helpful to get the material from people
... would be good to have a proposal when you create the issue, will send mail about this
... will be more productive that way
... any other comments about policy?
<trackbot> ISSUE-12 -- Gathering requirements for Gallery API -- OPEN
darobin: how do we orthogonalize
API design so that policy is still workable
... example is user grants access to gallery, depends on while
... simplest thing is to ignore the issue and hope policy system handles, but could be too simplistic
darobin: suggested to raise an issue about this, link above
darobin: Richard raised another issue, link above
<darobin> ISSUE: Orthogonality of API and Policy systems when an API has dependencies on other APIs
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-25 - Orthogonality of API and Policy systems when an API has dependencies on other APIs ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/25/edit .
richt: let's call it cross-module dependencies and impact on policy
darobin: means what you just said
richt: and the grouping of features and capabilities if that's relevant
darobin: now updated with the correct name
<fhirsch> issue-25 grant access to gallery yet gallery depends on file, is this implicit
darobin: potentially complicated
enough to discuss by mail not by phone
... would like to note that this has also been discussed in BONDI, input from those people welcome
marcin: issue 25 is related to discussion about policy, could combine them
<fhirsch> yes it is policy related
darobin: definitely, depending on decision about policy power, API could be designed to be free of policy issues, but also the other way around
<trackbot> ACTION-25 -- Marcin Hanclik to provide BONDI white paper on features and capabilities -- due 2009-10-07 -- OPEN
marcin: issue 25 is related to action 25
darobin: lucky strike
... thanks Marcin
... question of umbrella requirements document for APIs, any objections?
<dtran> Dzung Tran is on the phone (muted)
<fhirsch> yes to Robin's question, no objection
darobin: will check document to
IRC so that Bryan has something to work with, then move
... many requirements gathering issues, 7, 14, etc., discussions ongoing
... anyone have any issue they'd like to bring up regarding API reqs?
<dom> (umbrella req document relates to ISSUE-22, which I assume can now be closed)
richt: discussion about System
Information led to asynchronicity
... could be something to discuss in the umbrella document
... that should move to 'applies to all APIs' section, agreed
... anything else on API reqs?
darobin: will coordinate with
Bryan about the reqs posted so far, then start fleshing out the
... anything further on APIs?
fhirsch: no need to go one by one
fhirsch: but not that many, just ask status
darobin: three quarters are those just talked about in the API section, doesn't leave much
fhirsch; talk about error handling, but might make sense to wait
darobin: error handling better
discussed in e-mail
... there was the beginning of a thread, ISSUE-2
fhirsch: relationship of error
handling to security and leakage of information?
... any talk in BONDI?
darobin: hasn't been discussed as ISSUE-2, not sure about BONDI
fhirsch: maybe less important now
than other things
... end the call early if we run out of topics, continue actively on the list
... need to get enough material on the list to have a meaningful call
fhirsch: any concerns or issues to raise?
fhirsch: work on the issue and post on the list
darobin: great idea
<richt> Congraulations to Arve :-)
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/JereK:/JereK,/ Succeeded: s/yes/yes to Robin's question, no objection/ Succeeded: s/justed/just/ Succeeded: s/issue 14/issue-14/ Succeeded: s/fhirsch;/ fhirsch:/ Succeeded: s/ fhirsch:/fhirsch:/ Found Scribe: Jere Found ScribeNick: JereK Default Present: Frederick_Hirsch Present: Robin_Berjon Frederick_Hirsch Dominique_Hazaël-Massieux MarcoMarengo StephenLewontin Jere_Kapyaho LauraArribas hui_miao Marcin_Hanclik Paddy_Byers Ingmar_Kliche David_Rogers Richard_Tibbett Claudio_Venezia Claes_Nilsson WARNING: Replacing previous Regrets list. (Old list: TLR, Kangchan_Lee) Use 'Regrets+ ... ' if you meant to add people without replacing the list, such as: <dbooth> Regrets+ Thomas_Roessler, Arve_Bersvendsen, Kangchan_Lee Regrets: Thomas_Roessler Arve_Bersvendsen Kangchan_Lee Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2009Sep/0124.html Found Date: 30 Sep 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/09/30-dap-minutes.html People with action items: david marcin paddy stephen[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]