IRC log of dap on 2010-07-16

Timestamps are in UTC.

07:18:27 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dap
07:18:27 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/07/16-dap-irc
07:18:29 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
07:18:29 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #dap
07:18:31 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be DAP
07:18:31 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see UW_DAP(F2F)3:30AM scheduled to start in 12 minutes
07:18:32 [trackbot]
Meeting: Device APIs and Policy Working Group Teleconference
07:18:32 [trackbot]
Date: 16 July 2010
07:18:53 [jmorris]
Present+ John_Morris
07:18:57 [fjh]
Chair: Robin_Berjon, Frederick_Hirsch
07:19:29 [fjh]
Present+ Frederick_Hirsch
07:24:47 [soonho]
soonho has joined #dap
07:30:38 [ilkka]
Present+ Ilkka_Oksanen
07:36:52 [fjh]
Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/agendas/2010-07-15.txt
07:36:56 [alissa]
alissa has joined #dap
07:37:08 [alissa]
Present+ Alissa_Cooper
07:40:14 [marengo]
marengo has joined #dap
07:40:27 [nstratford]
Present+ Neil_Stratford
07:40:27 [dom]
Present+ Dominique_Hazael-Massieux
07:40:32 [soonho]
Present+ Soonho_Lee
07:40:36 [dom]
ScribeNick: nstratford
07:40:36 [nstratford]
scribeNick: nstratford
07:40:37 [marengo]
Present+ Marco_Marengo
07:41:29 [ingmar]
present+ Ingmar_Kliche
07:41:49 [wonsuk]
Present+ Wonsuk_Lee
07:42:19 [Kangchan]
Kangchan has joined #dap
07:42:57 [Claes]
Claes has joined #dap
07:43:49 [Claes]
Present+ Claes_Nilsson
07:44:10 [nwidell]
nwidell has joined #dap
07:44:33 [nwidell]
Present+ Niklas_Widell
07:45:47 [richt]
richt has joined #dap
07:46:01 [richt]
Present+ Richard_Tibbett
07:46:09 [hwoo]
hwoo has joined #dap
07:46:42 [dom]
nstratford, http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/audio/
07:46:57 [Seung]
Seung has joined #dap
07:47:43 [Seung]
present+ Seung-Yeon_Lee
07:48:07 [darobin]
darobin has joined #dap
07:48:32 [Dong-Young]
Dong-Young has joined #dap
07:48:56 [dom]
dom has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/agendas/2010-07-15.txt
07:51:11 [tlr]
tlr has joined #dap
07:51:40 [nstratford]
Topic: Capture
07:51:49 [Dong-Young]
Presence+ Dong-Young_Lee
07:51:57 [fjh]
reminder - agenda - discuss F2F after TPAC
07:52:00 [dom]
-> http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/camera/ HTML Form Based Media Capturing Editors draft
07:52:01 [LauraA]
LauraA has joined #dap
07:52:03 [wmaslowski]
wmaslowski has joined #dap
07:52:21 [LauraA]
present+ LauraA
07:52:28 [FanH]
FanH has joined #dap
07:52:54 [nstratford]
darobin: New re-arrangement of the API - we need to agree on the plan, when to have a draft and how soon to release. Good short-term interest - should push something out quickly and get feedback/implementations.
07:53:31 [paddy]
paddy has joined #dap
07:53:41 [Younsung]
Younsung has joined #dap
07:53:47 [danielcoloma]
danielcoloma has joined #dap
07:53:59 [danielcoloma]
Present+ Daniel_Coloma
07:54:11 [FanH]
Present+ Fan_HU
07:54:14 [nstratford]
ilkka: Two separate specification - 1. Form based (better name ideas?) - simple addition to html 5 - main discussion point is that the spec is now different, controlled by dap, or more integrated to html5
07:54:31 [nstratford]
darobin: easier to get the spec out rather than wait for html 5 consensus
07:54:35 [Claes]
Claes has joined #dap
07:54:40 [dom]
+1 to darobin
07:55:11 [nstratford]
... we can extend it, just not clash with it and coordinate not to cause problems
07:56:45 [richt]
q+ to ask if the 'source' parameter and the MediaFile proposals are bound together
07:57:01 [nstratford]
ilkka: addition we are proposing are additions to the accept parameter
07:57:26 [nstratford]
darobin: ok not to validate as html 5
07:58:50 [dom]
-> http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/number-state.html#attr-input-accept Accept parameter in HTML5 <input type="file"/>
07:58:59 [nstratford]
richt: do the source parameter and the media file api need to be bound together here? is it necessary to have both - can see the source parameter without this api
07:59:36 [nstratford]
darobin: feedback that MediaFile is being implemented
07:59:58 [maoteo]
maoteo has joined #dap
08:00:02 [nstratford]
ilkka: is a small extension to File
08:00:11 [maoteo]
Present+ Maria_Oteo
08:00:50 [nstratford]
richt: change type to be mime-type - need to be consistent
08:01:09 [bsulliva]
bsulliva has joined #dap
08:01:33 [bsulliva]
bsulliva has left #dap
08:01:44 [bsulliva]
bsulliva has joined #dap
08:02:42 [nstratford]
darobin: FormatData - eg. file.format.codecs - should it be a subfield or directly on MediaFile? Maybe inherit from FormatData and File?
08:02:56 [richt]
the parameters in FormatData also need to be made 'readonly'.
08:03:36 [richt]
further to the type/mime-type discussion I'd suggest that type can be removed from the 'MediaFile' interface as it is already provided in the 'File' interface
08:03:49 [dom]
The Blob interface already has a type attribute, cf http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#dfn-type
08:04:19 [nstratford]
tlr: since using mime-types - respect for extension points - do we need to mirror them
08:04:45 [nstratford]
... mime parameters are a list of tag value pairs
08:05:32 [nstratford]
... check formats actually use parameters - eg. video
08:06:19 [nstratford]
dom: remove the type attibute
08:07:23 [nstratford]
darobin: sequence or array for MediaList?
08:07:30 [nstratford]
ilkka: same as for FileList
08:08:31 [richt]
q?
08:08:33 [richt]
q-
08:08:50 [Younsung]
Present+ Younsung_Chu
08:09:01 [nstratford]
wonsuk: most of the information is covered by Media Annotations api - need to be consistent
08:09:02 [dom]
-> http://www.w3.org/TR/mediaont-api-1.0/ API for Media Resource 1.0
08:09:53 [nstratford]
ilkka: we should avoid overlap, but downside is creating dependencies (but that spec is in last call)
08:10:00 [KiYoung]
KiYoung has joined #dap
08:10:38 [KiYoung]
Present+ KiYoung_Kim
08:10:51 [nstratford]
wonsuk: Location information in the capture api?
08:11:12 [nstratford]
darobin: Should remove gelocation information from images
08:12:09 [nstratford]
... should have a note that we are looking into alignment with media annotations
08:14:10 [nstratford]
dom: Should remove the trusted environments example from section 5
08:14:51 [nstratford]
darobin: Do we say enough in section 5 to properly integrate with html5?
08:17:25 [nstratford]
darobin: Impacts of exposing capture attribute in the dom - parameter is easier to implement
08:18:42 [LauraA]
LauraA has joined #dap
08:19:14 [nstratford]
tlr: Do we need to specify what happens if you have an input element is changed in the dom?
08:19:49 [nstratford]
darobin: agree that prefer a parameter over an attribute?
08:20:35 [dom]
(I think the FileAPI, HTML5, RFC4281 should be normative refs; WebIDL should also be added as normative ref)
08:22:42 [dom]
ACTION: Dom to update media capture form for publication next week
08:22:42 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-233 - Update media capture form for publication next week [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2010-07-23].
08:23:09 [richt]
Interesting angle to this stuff: http://blog.nihilogic.dk/2008/05/reading-exif-data-with-javascript.html. Any potential that this covers the FormatData interface parameters? (no EXIF for video yet though :-( )
08:23:23 [dom]
PROPOSED RESOLUTION: we publish capture-forms as an update to TR/capture-api pending the changes discussed today are implemented
08:23:56 [dom]
richt, I think leaving EXIF to the javasript layer is probably best for now
08:23:57 [nstratford]
bryan: intent is to split into two peices - leaves all the capture part to the implementation (clarification)
08:24:44 [nstratford]
Claes: shouldn't this just be an update to html5?
08:25:43 [richt]
dom, I agree that the Media Capture spec goes a lot further than EXIF info, which is currently limited to a small number of formats.
08:25:45 [nstratford]
bsulliva: between dap and webapps we have the charter to connect html5 web runtime to the world - so it's better fitting here
08:26:53 [nstratford]
claes: Many other things can build on top of the input element
08:27:33 [tlr]
ACTION: dom to seek review of capture-forms from HTML WG, Webapps once FPWD is published
08:27:33 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-234 - Seek review of capture-forms from HTML WG, Webapps once FPWD is published [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2010-07-23].
08:28:18 [nstratford]
bsulliva: Can we be more specific in the reference to html5 in the specification? where does it talk about creating media files?
08:28:42 [nstratford]
... as part of the File Upload state feature
08:30:55 [nstratford]
... What about the name of the specification? - the short name will change (html media capture)
08:34:48 [dom]
http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/camera/Overview-API.html
08:37:51 [dom]
RESOLUTION: we publish html-media-capture as an update to TR/capture-api pending the changes discussed today are implemented
08:39:07 [dom]
s/<dom> RESOLUTION:/<nstratford> RESOLUTION:/
08:39:26 [darobin]
RESOLUTION: we publish a WD of Media Capture API as soon as Ingmar has polished it
08:39:35 [darobin]
ACTION: Ingmar to polish Media Capture
08:39:35 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-235 - Polish Media Capture [on Ingmar Kliche - due 2010-07-23].
08:40:27 [hwoo]
hwoo has joined #dap
08:41:32 [nstratford]
Topic: Sysinfo cfc status
08:42:08 [nstratford]
darobin: Security section has been re-writen, changed the privacy section - new editors draft before decide on last cal
08:43:20 [fjh]
ACTION-191?
08:43:20 [trackbot]
ACTION-191 -- James Salsman to send pre-LC editorial comments on system-info and camera/Media Capture -- due 2010-06-16 -- CLOSED
08:43:20 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/191
08:43:28 [fjh]
I object because the agreed-upon changes from ACTION-191 --
08:43:29 [fjh]
http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/191 -- and ACTION-202 have
08:43:29 [fjh]
been made in the diagram but not in the text, and there is no
08:43:29 [fjh]
clarification about the meaning of an active connection in a
08:43:29 [fjh]
multi-homed situation.
08:43:42 [fjh]
quote from James
08:44:51 [Marcos]
Marcos has joined #dap
08:45:02 [fjh]
james email - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Jul/0077.html
08:45:16 [fjh]
s/I object because the agreed-upon changes from ACTION-191 --//
08:45:26 [fjh]
s/http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/191 -- and ACTION-202 have//
08:45:35 [fjh]
s/been made in the diagram but not in the text, and there is no//
08:45:43 [fjh]
s/clarification about the meaning of an active connection in a//
08:45:52 [fjh]
s/multi-homed situation.//
08:45:52 [nstratford]
Topic: Coordination we other groups
08:46:03 [fjh]
s/quote from James//
08:46:07 [fjh]
rrsagent, generate minutes
08:46:07 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/07/16-dap-minutes.html fjh
08:47:45 [nstratford]
tlr: Calendar - internatonalisation, timezone. Contacts (how fits with IETF vcard?)
08:48:23 [nstratford]
darobin: Units from sysinfo - which bandwidth metric/luminance/decibel
08:48:53 [fjh]
s;http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/191 -- and ACTION-202 have;;
08:49:11 [nstratford]
tlr: Sysinfo: network, contacts, calendar - need more on messaging before review
08:49:31 [nstratford]
richt: Portable contacts people as well
08:52:10 [nstratford]
bsulliva: difficulty because we have our own schema - OMA are trying to do things in a coordinated way - how close can CAB(?) be to what they need
08:52:26 [richt]
RE: OMA CAB/PoCo/vCard relationship to Contacts API -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Jun/0273.html
08:53:51 [nstratford]
darobin: make sure CAB are aware of our work
08:54:59 [tlr]
q+
08:55:26 [nstratford]
Dong-Young: CAB is defining it's own format, concerns related to deployment because of own format - making effort to make compatible with vCard - should be in this group as well
08:57:34 [nstratford]
richt: A lot of people are behind portable contacts that go beyond vCard - but portable contacts inherits from vCard - scope of the contacts api is much larger
08:57:59 [richt]
List of providers of Portable Contacts information: http://wiki.portablecontacts.net/Software-and-Services-using-Portable-Contacts
08:58:16 [nstratford]
tlr: Three way coordination between IETF vCard, CAB and us is required
08:58:40 [tlr]
ACTION: thomas to report back on IETF relationships after Maastricht meeting
08:58:40 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-236 - Report back on IETF relationships after Maastricht meeting [on Thomas Roessler - due 2010-07-23].
08:59:00 [tlr]
ACTION-236: Calendar formats and protocols (calDAV, recurrence model, solilunar calendar and internationalization)
08:59:00 [trackbot]
ACTION-236 Report back on IETF relationships after Maastricht meeting notes added
08:59:15 [tlr]
ACTION-236: Contacts API (PoCo, Vcard, relationship to OMA CAB work)
08:59:15 [trackbot]
ACTION-236 Report back on IETF relationships after Maastricht meeting notes added
08:59:30 [tlr]
ACTION-236: Sysinfo (bandwidth metrics)
08:59:30 [trackbot]
ACTION-236 Report back on IETF relationships after Maastricht meeting notes added
08:59:39 [darobin]
ACTION: Robin to talk to TC-39 about TimezonedDate once it's ready
08:59:39 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-237 - Talk to TC-39 about TimezonedDate once it's ready [on Robin Berjon - due 2010-07-23].
08:59:52 [tlr]
ACTION-236 due 2010-07-31
08:59:52 [trackbot]
ACTION-236 Report back on IETF relationships after Maastricht meeting due date now 2010-07-31
08:59:55 [tlr]
action-236?
08:59:55 [trackbot]
ACTION-236 -- Thomas Roessler to report back on IETF relationships after Maastricht meeting -- due 2010-07-31 -- OPEN
08:59:55 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/236
09:01:18 [nstratford]
bsulliva: Working to align with OMA work - SysInfo attributes and CPM(?) for messaging APIs - CPM is a broad framework for messaging of all types
09:02:08 [darobin]
ACTION: bsulliva to inform OMA groups of our status
09:02:08 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-238 - Inform OMA groups of our status [on Bryan Sullivan - due 2010-07-23].
09:02:38 [nstratford]
Topic: Next face to face organisation
09:11:27 [dom]
ACTION: Dom to prepare survey on finding a date for a F2F meeting in Seoul, in Feb/Mar 2011
09:11:27 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-239 - Prepare survey on finding a date for a F2F meeting in Seoul, in Feb/Mar 2011 [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2010-07-23].
09:11:51 [darobin]
ACTION: Kangchan to look into hosting at ETRI in late Feb/early Mar 2011
09:11:51 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-240 - Look into hosting at ETRI in late Feb/early Mar 2011 [on Kangchan Lee - due 2010-07-23].
09:12:43 [darobin]
RESOLUTION: first meeting of 2011 in Korea
09:13:02 [darobin]
RESOLUTION: The group thanks David and WAC for hosting
09:14:49 [hwoo]
Present+ hong_woo
09:17:35 [wmaslowski]
wmaslowski has joined #dap
09:36:03 [LauraA]
topic: privacy
09:36:51 [LauraA]
fjh: powerbox and privacy
09:37:11 [LauraA]
... might not be necessary to use rulesets in powerbox
09:37:40 [fjh]
s/might not be necessary/might be possible/
09:38:27 [fjh]
seems logical to integrate user privacy information with introduction/discovery mechanism
09:38:33 [LauraA]
bsulliva: a protocol in which you have a provider interact with an authoriser on behalf of the user is what powerbox is about
09:38:55 [fjh]
not to say inappropriate for APIs as discussed earlier, though we've also discussed issues for that
09:39:54 [LauraA]
alissa: somewhere there has to be a UI element that allows the user to stablish what privacy aplies with which data
09:40:20 [LauraA]
alissa: user needs to get involved at one point. thus, there needs to be a UI element
09:41:05 [hwoo]
hwoo has joined #dap
09:42:04 [LauraA]
nwidell: powebox allows the user to install the provider you trust
09:42:49 [alissa]
s/nwidell/Claes/
09:43:27 [LauraA]
jmorris: for control policies powerbox might be a good thing, we will look at it to get a better understanding
09:45:07 [LauraA]
??: for attaching privacy rules, this can be easly implemented by a header in HTTP,
09:45:37 [soonho]
s/??/Dong-Young
09:46:08 [LauraA]
fhj: not just a technical problem, need to consider the whole ecosystem
09:46:34 [LauraA]
dom: we identified the set of issues. we should at least rough ideas how we are going to deal with these issues
09:46:48 [LauraA]
fhj: we just listed the issues against it
09:47:36 [LauraA]
dom: we have a plan. we have these issues, we need to decide if we address them or ignore them.
09:47:58 [LauraA]
dom: alissa will document the issues
09:48:46 [bsulliva]
q+
09:48:49 [tlr]
q-
09:49:01 [LauraA]
jmorris: we'll go through the list and provide responses to these items
09:50:07 [LauraA]
... some items are resolvable. We might want to identify communities that would implement this.
09:50:22 [LauraA]
... if we are not able to find this community, that we might not want to spend time on this
09:50:59 [LauraA]
dom: all the privacy investment we are doing is not in rulesets
09:52:24 [fjh]
jmorris notes powerbox might be able to enable access decisions including privacy as inputs, but might not help transmitting rules aspect
09:52:31 [fjh]
s/fhj/fjh
09:52:33 [LauraA]
dom: in terms of experimental implementations, there were two options presented
09:52:49 [LauraA]
alissa: having a sort of RI will be the only way to make some progress
09:53:20 [LauraA]
dom: i might be able to help
09:53:35 [Claes]
+1 for RI on rule sets
09:53:48 [LauraA]
darobin: me too. I think it's better if it was not hosted by W3C
09:53:54 [fjh]
discussion of possible prototype
09:54:17 [fjh]
q?
09:54:26 [LauraA]
alisaa: we would need 2 parts: browser extension and a site that makes use of them.
09:54:51 [fjh]
ck bsullivan
09:54:51 [fjh]
\
09:54:54 [fjh]
ack bsullivan
09:54:58 [fjh]
ack bsulliva
09:55:07 [fjh]
s/ack bsullivan//
09:55:08 [LauraA]
darobin: it could be simpler, just having a site, where a user configures the privacy settings
09:55:18 [fjh]
s/\\//
09:55:24 [wmaslowski]
wmaslowski has joined #dap
09:56:30 [LauraA]
bsulliva: a specification of some sort of data format is required, like rule sets. I think we should write a recommendation to support rule sets.
09:56:44 [bsulliva]
q-
09:57:23 [LauraA]
jmorris: the rule set proposal would generate controversy within the privacy community
09:58:27 [LauraA]
... many would view it as compromising privacy. The rule set idea is unlike to have any traction on its own.
09:59:12 [fjh]
s/many would view it as compromising privacy. The rule set idea is unlike to have any traction on its own.//
09:59:14 [LauraA]
bsulliva: to me rule set is just a definition of a preference or an intent
09:59:19 [richt]
jmorris, the ability to block contextual advertising in a user-generated privacy policy is going to jar with a lot of web business models. i.e. you get the service for free in exchange for contextual advertising.
09:59:23 [fjh]
s/the rule set proposal would generate controversy within the privacy community//
10:00:34 [LauraA]
fjh: this is not a technical concern, is a political concern
10:00:51 [richt]
...'contextual advertising' is often the price you pay for free services. This also applies to the cost/benefit ration of other compromises of user privacy.
10:01:01 [richt]
s/ration/ration/
10:01:03 [richt]
s/ration/ratio/
10:01:36 [LauraA]
bsulliva: why do we need to define a default policy?
10:01:47 [LauraA]
jmorris: the value is that it works with many websites
10:01:51 [fjh]
want default privacy policy that works widely on the web
10:02:04 [fjh]
want policy that can be understood and is meaningful
10:02:06 [fjh]
q?
10:02:16 [fjh]
q+ to ask about actions and next steps
10:02:30 [LauraA]
dom: what Bryan was pointing to is that it makes sense to have possible values of the rule sets defined
10:02:42 [danielcoloma]
danielcoloma has joined #dap
10:03:19 [fjh]
buy-in from various stakeholders is important
10:03:26 [LauraA]
jmorris: i agree with that. the rule set document should get buy in from the privacy community.
10:04:46 [LauraA]
fjh: should we have an action to look at powerbox?
10:05:00 [LauraA]
jmorris: fine, we are happy to look at powerbox.
10:06:21 [LauraA]
bsulliva: result from this discussion: we don't feel is good to define a framework in which the policy is set by the user?
10:06:41 [LauraA]
fjh: we didn't say that..
10:08:13 [LauraA]
bsulliva: we have a proposal for having 3 buckets because we think is simpler. Are we going to allow users to say "no, i don't want to allow..." ?
10:08:26 [LauraA]
alissa: there are the 3 choices and they are what they are
10:09:05 [tlr]
q+
10:09:58 [LauraA]
tlr: I don't really know what it means "to break the web", it's better to frame this issue and focus on next steps, etc
10:11:01 [LauraA]
fjh: the assumption is that by doing some simplification it might get adopted more easily
10:12:11 [fjh]
bryan asks about maintenance and change related to rulesets over time
10:12:12 [LauraA]
alissa: there are arguments on both sides. Some think it's too complex, some others think it's not complex enough
10:14:30 [LauraA]
bsulliva: one last point, tying to the work being done elsewhere. When we get to the point of defining a policy framework, if we define set policies with specific settings, it's going to be difficult to comply to all different markets.
10:15:49 [fjh]
ISSUE; different regulatory environments and relationship to privacy and rulesets
10:16:04 [fjh]
ISSUE;: different regulatory environments and relationship to privacy and rulesets
10:16:13 [fjh]
ISSUE: different regulatory environments and relationship to privacy and rulesets
10:16:13 [trackbot]
Created ISSUE-95 - Different regulatory environments and relationship to privacy and rulesets ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/95/edit .
10:16:22 [fjh]
s/ISSUE;: different regulatory environments and relationship to privacy and rulesets//
10:16:31 [LauraA]
tlr: regarding different regulatory environments, as John set about the privacy community, this is also something that will come up for privacy.
10:16:32 [fjh]
s/ISSUE; different regulatory environments and relationship to privacy and rulesets//
10:16:41 [fjh]
q?
10:16:45 [fjh]
ack fjh
10:16:45 [Zakim]
fjh, you wanted to ask about actions and next steps
10:16:51 [fjh]
ack tlr
10:18:18 [LauraA]
topic: policy
10:19:37 [fjh]
API sections, Features
10:19:58 [paddy]
yes, will dial in in a few minutes
10:20:09 [dom]
zakim, code?
10:20:09 [Zakim]
the conference code is 3279 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), dom
10:21:00 [paddy]
pls continue, I'll dial in ASAP
10:23:12 [paddy]
no, laptop microphone is not working :(
10:23:27 [paddy]
ok
10:23:38 [Zakim]
UW_DAP(F2F)3:30AM has now started
10:23:45 [Zakim]
+meeting_room
10:24:32 [paddy]
ok, just leaving another call ..
10:24:52 [fjh]
http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/features/
10:26:23 [dom]
-> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/wiki/ApiCheckList#Privacy_.26_Security_Considerations Privacy & Security Consideration
10:27:05 [LauraA]
dom: I added privacy and security sub-sections in the API checklist
10:27:10 [fjh]
the checklist now includes questions that should be answered by each API in privacy and security considerations section
10:27:24 [LauraA]
... I am going to send a link to the mailing list
10:27:25 [Zakim]
+??P1
10:27:35 [LauraA]
... this should be part of our regular check list
10:27:37 [fjh]
zakim, ??P1 is paddy
10:27:37 [Zakim]
+paddy; got it
10:27:38 [paddy]
zakim, ??P1 is paddy
10:27:38 [Zakim]
I already had ??P1 as paddy, paddy
10:27:46 [paddy]
present+ Paddy_Byers
10:28:06 [LauraA]
fjh: we are all free to add to these questions
10:28:50 [Kangchan]
Present+ Kangchan_Lee
10:29:08 [LauraA]
fjh: Features --> i created a draft including the feature definitions from BONDI
10:29:32 [LauraA]
... I reference the feature element in P&C
10:29:47 [LauraA]
... I am not sure we want to define a set of capabilities
10:29:49 [richt]
fjh's draft: http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/features/
10:30:02 [LauraA]
paddy: how does this document relate to existing documents?
10:30:13 [LauraA]
... it would make sense to have just one set of definitions we all agree on
10:31:02 [LauraA]
fjh: it might be good to focus on the features draft and not worry about repeating content in different docs
10:31:40 [dom]
q+
10:31:46 [LauraA]
paddy: the scope of this document is --> defining what a feature is, define a list of features and those definitions are going to be linked to a different API draft
10:32:35 [LauraA]
dom: we don't need to restrict ourselves to the set of APIs this WG is defining, like Geolocation
10:33:04 [LauraA]
fjh: i agree. I didn't include references to the API docs yet, but these should be there, of course.
10:33:04 [richt]
Rather than using http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/features/* for features maybe we should use http://w3.org/device/f/* or something similar? It's probably not a big deal right now....bikesheding aside :-/
10:34:00 [LauraA]
fjh: not sure what else we could do with policy right now
10:34:39 [LauraA]
dom: It was interesting that Ian stated that a policy might be something they consider for the future
10:35:55 [LauraA]
paddy: There is interest around the table to define the policy framework well but support is needed from all those interested in moving the policy work forward. The discussion with Ian was quite encouraging.
10:36:35 [fjh]
action: fjh to review and update policy requirements
10:36:36 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-241 - Review and update policy requirements [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2010-07-23].
10:36:44 [fjh]
action: paddy to review and update policy requirements
10:36:44 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-242 - Review and update policy requirements [on Paddy Byers - due 2010-07-23].
10:37:08 [LauraA]
fjh: 2 things to do
10:37:28 [LauraA]
... feature stuff and requirements&policy
10:38:04 [fjh]
update requirements to clarify focus and objectives
10:39:16 [paddy]
q+
10:39:22 [dom]
(I think it's critical to define use cases for the in-entreprise usage of the policy framewrok)
10:39:53 [dom]
q-
10:39:57 [fjh]
ack paddy
10:42:10 [fjh]
paddy notes trust domains, rule separation topic to discuss later; whether to use XACML or something similar or not etc
10:42:11 [LauraA]
dom: in the requirements document, we could include use cases of policy in the enteprise context
10:42:25 [fjh]
possible use case - configuration for child protection/use by operator etc
10:43:10 [LauraA]
paddy: do any operators around the room have any views of the enterprise use cases?
10:43:26 [fjh]
enterprise use case might not be driven by operator, but by enterprise itself
10:44:24 [LauraA]
dom: we are talking about the policy reqs document to make it more interesting for other parties
10:44:54 [LauraA]
bsulliva: we could help to give an example of these use cases
10:51:02 [fjh]
q?
10:51:33 [soonho]
(Especially, in web application for B2B, it's so important to consider enterprise use cases)
10:51:33 [LauraA]
fjh: are we done with policy?
10:52:02 [LauraA]
fjh: we are done with policy now.
10:55:41 [Zakim]
-meeting_room
10:55:43 [Zakim]
-paddy
10:55:43 [Zakim]
UW_DAP(F2F)3:30AM has ended
10:55:45 [Zakim]
Attendees were meeting_room, paddy
10:55:56 [jmorris]
jmorris has left #dap
10:56:58 [bsulliva]
bsulliva has joined #dap
10:57:30 [bsulliva]
Here is the link to the message I sent with comment on the Policy Rulesets proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Jul/0099.html
11:48:50 [bsulliva]
bsulliva has joined #dap
12:12:09 [LauraA]
fjh: should we go through the issues?
12:12:36 [fjh]
http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/open
12:12:40 [LauraA]
fjh: I'll bring up the issues list
12:12:50 [fjh]
ISSUE-26?
12:12:50 [trackbot]
ISSUE-26 -- How to refer to API -- open
12:12:50 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/26
12:12:55 [nwidell]
nwidell has joined #dap
12:14:31 [Claes]
Claes has joined #dap
12:15:03 [fjh]
ISSUE-29?
12:15:03 [trackbot]
ISSUE-29 -- Should DAP APIs support "API Keys" -- open
12:15:03 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/29
12:16:10 [fjh]
social network requires application specific key
12:18:22 [fjh]
sounds like extensibility point needed. Goal to enable authentication to service by javascript
12:18:45 [fjh]
ISSUE-29 and ISSUE-30 are the same or related
12:19:08 [fjh]
ISSUE-34?
12:19:08 [trackbot]
ISSUE-34 -- Protecting data versus protecting apis -- open
12:19:08 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/34
12:20:48 [fjh]
see note from Richard
12:21:22 [fjh]
ISSUE-56 closed
12:21:22 [trackbot]
ISSUE-56 Add custom copyright notice closed
12:22:08 [fjh]
ISSUE-54?
12:22:08 [trackbot]
ISSUE-54 -- What messaging use cases cannot be fulfilled by existing URI schemes (mailto, sms, mms)? -- open
12:22:08 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/54
12:22:29 [fjh]
issue-54 closed
12:22:29 [trackbot]
ISSUE-54 What messaging use cases cannot be fulfilled by existing URI schemes (mailto, sms, mms)? closed
12:23:06 [fjh]
issue-78?
12:23:06 [trackbot]
ISSUE-78 -- Capture has a minimisation problem with EXIF data (e.g. it could be Geotagged) -- open
12:23:06 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/78
12:23:37 [fjh]
add warning to capture API regarding EXIF data
12:26:17 [fjh]
next teleconference is 4 August
12:26:20 [fjh]
adjorn
12:26:27 [fjh]
s/adjorn/adjourn
12:26:32 [fjh]
rrsagent, generate minutes
12:26:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/07/16-dap-minutes.html fjh
12:26:57 [wonsuk]
wonsuk has left #dap
12:27:30 [fjh]
s/yes, will dial in in a few minutes//
12:27:42 [fjh]
s/pls continue, I'll dial in ASAP//
12:27:51 [fjh]
s/no, laptop microphone is not working :(//
12:27:55 [fjh]
s/ok//
12:28:06 [fjh]
s/ ok, just leaving another call ..//
12:28:29 [fjh]
rrsagent, generate minutes
12:28:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/07/16-dap-minutes.html fjh
13:30:43 [Marcos_]
Marcos_ has joined #dap
13:49:33 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #dap
14:24:58 [paddy]
paddy has joined #dap
14:33:55 [paddy]
paddy has joined #dap
14:57:11 [paddy]
paddy has joined #dap
15:05:27 [paddy]
paddy has joined #dap