See also: IRC log
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
AB: yesterday I sent a draft agenda to the list ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/1058.html ). Any change requests?
AB: any short announcements?
AB: later today we will discuss
publishing a CR with the Team ( http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-digsig/
). We have 1 hour for two specs.
... I expect most of the discussion to focus "what's
changed?".
... since CR#1 was published, we effectively applied two Change
Requests: the first included moving from C14N 1.0 to 1.1 and
some other fixes and the second change request fixed a few bugs
and increased the spec's "testability".
... the changes between July 2009 CR and April 15 LCWD are
briefly summarized in the status section ( http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-widgets-digsig-20100415/#status
) and more details can be found in the following thread (
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/0054.html
).
... hoping FH could lead that discussion
... since FH isn't here now, I follow-up with him about the
call
MC: yes, FH should be on the call to talk about those changes
AB: the changes between the 15
April LCWD and 11 May LCWD are summarized in the 11 May LC (
http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-widgets-digsig-20100511/#changes-since-last-publication-
).
... while we wait for FH to join, any other issues or concerns
re DigSig?
MC: I feel confident about this
AB: again the changes between July 2009 CR and April 15 LCWD are briefly summarized in the status section ( http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-widgets-digsig-20100415/#status ) and more details can be found in the following thread ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/0054.html ).
FH: yes, I will be there
... have any issues been raised?
AB: not that I know about
... anything else on digsig
AB: re today's CR ( http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/waf/widgets-vmmf/CR.html
) call with the Team, are there any concerns or issue?
... Robin is not likely to attend the call but Marcos agreed to
take the lead
MC: I looked at the disposition of comments and don't see any issues
AB: anyone have concerns about the view-mode spec?
AB: Marcos added text re "Changes Since Last Publication" ( http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/pub/#changes-since-last-publication ). Any comments?
SP: no concerns
AB: we need to talk about
Normative References and PR. The [Sniff] spec is a Normative
Reference. Does this block us from publishing a PR?
... I want to understand if this is a problem?
SP: if it is a WIP we have a prob
AB: what is the process here?
SP: a normative ref should be in
step with the spec to be published
... it can be one step behind but only briefly
AB: the ref is:
[[
[SNIFF]
Media Type Sniffing. A. Barth and I. Hickson. IETF. November 5, 2010 (Work in Progress).
]]
<Steven> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff-05
AB: what does this mean Steven?
SP: not sure about the status of this spec
AB: I don't know about the IETF process
SP: yes, I haven't referenced IETF WIPs so I don't know how this is handled
<scribe> ACTION: barstow work with StevenP re the [Sniff] IETF reference in the widget packaging spec [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/06/17-wam-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-561 - Work with StevenP re the [Sniff] IETF reference in the widget packaging spec [on Arthur Barstow - due 2010-06-24].
AB: Marcos, are there any other references issue for P&C spec?
MC: Widget DigSig but that will
soon be CR
... CSS21 is still a CR
... I think Sniff spec is the only issue
AB: we will wait to hear from the Team on how we deal with Sniff spec
AB: The TWI spec ( http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/
) has a Normative dependency on Web IDL.
... and we also have no active Editor for Web IDL
MC: one idea is to use OMG
IDL
... that was used previously
... we don't really need Web IDL
... we can use prose instead
... the interface is so simple
... In this case, TWI spec doesn't really win anything by using
Web IDL
AB: I came to the same
conclusion
... my pref would be to not add a new ref but to update the
spec directly
... by that I mean do not reference OMG IDL
... I noticed only 3 Web IDL refs: ReadONly, Supplemental,
NoInterfaceObject
... and I think we could simply cut-and-paste some definitions
and hence not need the reference
MC: yes, I agree
<bryan_sullivan> +1
AB: we can create a new section that includes these defs and just explain that since Web IDL isn't ready, we copied the definitions we need
MC: yes, could do that
BS: yes, that makes sense to
me
... but we do need to address the Web IDL Editor issue
AB: yes, agree
... if we go that route to add definitions into the spec, will
that require going back to LC?
... I think the precedence we've followed to date is that if we
just do a cut-and-paste, we haven't really changed anything
that would affect an implementation
... thus, no need to go back to LC
MC: sounds good
SP: I think that would be
OK
... I don't think it would change any software
... so that's OK with me
MC: yes, agree
AB: so the consensus is that cutting and pasting definitions from Web IDL to the TWI spec would not require a new LC
SP: I talked to Ian Jacobs -
don't make normative references to unstable materials
... in this case, Sniff may change
... thus it needs to be stable
MC: I would argue Sniff is
already widely implemented
... it has been part of the Web Platform for a long time
... We can get some status from Adam
... I think it is good and matches reality
<scribe> ACTION: Marcos determine the status of IETF's Sniff spec [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/06/17-wam-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-562 - Determine the status of IETF's Sniff spec [on Marcos Caceres - due 2010-06-24].
SP: formally, CSS2.1 is also a
problem case for Widget P&C spec
... the mis-match must be brief
... want the references to be at equal states
MC: P&C references CSS
pixels
... I don't think we want to copy that entire section of
CSS2.1
<scribe> ACTION: marcso work with ArtB and SteveP re P&C's reference to CSS2.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/06/17-wam-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - marcso
AB: does anyone know the plan for CSS2.1 to go to PR?
MC: I don't know if it ever will
go to PR
... since it will need thousands of tests
<Marcos> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#length-units
MC: we can copy some text re pixels
AB: I thought a spec could be parked in PR even though its refs were not yet in PR
SP: no, that's not the way it
works
... A person couldn't really vote on a spec if it is in PR if
its refs were not stable
... if a ref is not stable, it can still change
MC: we do have an "out" for P&C and CSS2.1 because CSS2.0 includes the identical text for pixels
AB: the Widget Interface
normative refernces HTML5
... so we'll need to think about that as well as Web
Storage
... we also still have ISSUE-116 ( http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/116
) open.
MC: nothing new to report on
that
... expect some progress next week
AB: last call for spec discussions for today ...
AB: Calls during the summer and summer holidays. In general, I don't want to have a call if lead Editor isn't available.
<Steven> Regrets for next week, 29 Jul, and the first three weeks of Aug
AB: make the next call July
1
... re planning, roadmap, ToDos, etc., see the Action list and
PubStatus page (
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/PubStatus#Widget_Specifications
)
SP: we are still waiting for WARP PAG to conclude, right?
AB: yes
... anything else for today?
<Steven> http://www.w3.org/2010/webapps/charter/
MC: what about a widget conformace checker?
AB: if it is non-normative, we can publish it
SP: yes, agree
MC: OK, I may bring this up later
AB: that would be a great
idea
... 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) Succeeded: s/AUg/Aug/ Found ScribeNick: ArtB Found Scribe: Art Present: Art Marcos StevenP bryan_sullivan Bryan Frederick Regrets: Robin Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/1058.html Got date from IRC log name: 17 Jun 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/06/17-wam-minutes.html People with action items: barstow marcos marcso[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]