IRC log of webapps on 2011-10-31

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:54:50 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #webapps
15:54:50 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:54:57 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, make log Public
15:55:13 [ArtB]
Chair: Art_Barstow, Charles_McCathieNevile
15:55:30 [ArtB]
15:55:39 [ArtB]
Meeting: WebApps f2f Meeeting
15:56:41 [adrianba]
adrianba has joined #webapps
15:57:36 [Zakim]
RWC_WAPI(WebAppsWG)12:00PM has now started
15:57:37 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.988.aaaa
15:58:26 [davida]
davida has joined #webapps
15:58:36 [JonathanJ]
JonathanJ has joined #webapps
15:58:40 [chaals]
chaals has joined #webapps
15:58:49 [dom]
dom has joined #webapps
15:59:10 [richt]
richt has joined #webapps
15:59:32 [dom]
RRSAgent, this meeting spans midnight
15:59:43 [Kai]
Kai has joined #webapps
15:59:55 [pererik]
pererik has joined #webapps
16:00:24 [Ms2ger]
Zakim, what's the code?
16:00:24 [Zakim]
the conference code is 2011 (tel:+1.617.761.6200, Ms2ger
16:00:59 [Zakim]
16:01:19 [anne]
anne has joined #webapps
16:01:21 [anne]
hey chaals
16:01:25 [anne]
long time
16:01:25 [Ms2ger]
Hai :)
16:01:25 [chaals]
rrsagent, pointer?
16:01:25 [RRSAgent]
16:01:25 [aizu]
aizu has joined #webapps
16:01:58 [Ms2ger]
anne, look over your shoulder, perhaps? :)
16:02:09 [weinig]
weinig has joined #webapps
16:02:15 [anne]
maybe if you're a woman and working here
16:02:20 [anne]
at the Marriott that is
16:02:32 [dom]
nice way to hide yourself!
16:02:34 [ArtB]
Scribe: Art
16:02:52 [forty4]
forty4 has joined #webapps
16:03:29 [ArtB]
Present: Art
16:03:55 [Ms2ger]
Just you? :)
16:04:39 [ArtB]
Present+ Charles
16:04:40 [chaals]
Present+ chaals
16:04:41 [shanec]
shanec has joined #webapps
16:04:41 [dom]
Present+ Dom
16:04:44 [heycam]
Present+ Cameron
16:04:50 [JonathanJ]
16:04:51 [lgombos]
Present+ Laszlo_Gombos
16:05:06 [Eliot_]
present+ Eliot Graff
16:05:09 [weinig]
Present+ Sam Weinig
16:05:19 [jrossi2]
Present+ Jacob Rossi
16:05:20 [Eliot_]
16:05:21 [anne]
Present+ anne
16:05:27 [krisk]
krisk has joined #webapps
16:05:35 [krisk]
16:05:46 [Soonho]
Soonho has joined #webapps
16:05:50 [Josh_Soref]
Scribe: Josh_Soref
16:05:54 [Josh_Soref]
Present+ Josh_Soref
16:06:01 [pererik]
Present+ pererik
16:06:03 [Zakim]
16:06:04 [Ms2ger]
Present+ Kris Krueger
16:06:04 [Zakim]
16:06:04 [Zakim]
16:06:37 [chaals]
zakim, this is webapps
16:06:37 [Zakim]
chaals, this was already RWC_WAPI(WebAppsWG)12:00PM
16:06:38 [Zakim]
ok, chaals; that matches RWC_WAPI(WebAppsWG)12:00PM
16:06:49 [JonathanJ]
Agenda -
16:06:51 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: the way we've run these big tpac meetings is to try to get as much flexibility to the topics in the meeting room
16:07:10 [Josh_Soref]
... we have a very large list of identified topics that we (i and the group) have identified
16:07:14 [smaug]
Zakim: [IPcaller] is Olli_Pettay
16:07:17 [smaug]
I think
16:07:22 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #webapps
16:07:26 [smaug]
Zakim, [IPcaller] is Olli_Pettay
16:07:26 [Zakim]
+Olli_Pettay; got it
16:07:28 [Josh_Soref]
s/I think//
16:07:28 [hayato]
hayato has joined #webapps
16:07:33 [R_Berkoff]
R_Berkoff has joined #webapps
16:07:34 [Josh_Soref]
... given this, we can use some time to determine what to talk about tomorrow
16:07:47 [Josh_Soref]
... it's hard for me to determine how much time the things i've allocated for today will take
16:08:03 [Josh_Soref]
... it's possible we'll have holes, and we can either take breaks or pull in topics from tomorrow
16:08:12 [magnus]
magnus has joined #webapps
16:08:18 [Josh_Soref]
... we want to be flexible and be able to hash out big issues
16:08:20 [magnus]
present+ magnus
16:08:24 [SungOk_You]
SungOk_You has joined #webapps
16:08:30 [Josh_Soref]
... let's start by looking at potential topics for tomorrow
16:08:48 [Josh_Soref]
... is there a lot of interest on talking about these things, and if so, when do we want to talk about them
16:08:56 [sangwhan]
sangwhan has joined #webapps
16:09:03 [Josh_Soref]
... what we did last year was count how many people are interested (show of hands)
16:09:07 [Josh_Soref]
... testing - 11
16:09:13 [shepazu]
present+ shepazu
16:09:21 [Josh_Soref]
... joint meetings w/ other WGs
16:09:30 [Josh_Soref]
... -- that people want to shoehorn
16:09:40 [JonathanJ]
JonathanJ has joined #webapps
16:09:40 [Josh_Soref]
... Joint Meetings - 0
16:09:54 [SungOk_You]
Present+ SungOk_You
16:09:56 [bryan]
bryan has joined #webapps
16:10:06 [Josh_Soref]
... XBL2 ... has been a deliverable for 5 years or so... there was a thread, "is it dead?"
16:10:15 [Josh_Soref]
... XBL2 - 12
16:10:18 [Josh_Soref]
16:10:25 [cyril]
cyril has joined #webapps
16:10:27 [dowan]
Present+ Dowan
16:10:35 [mav]
mav has joined #webapps
16:10:36 [Josh_Soref]
... DOM Mutations ...
16:10:46 [Josh_Soref]
[ not dominique mutations -- laughter ]
16:10:46 [bryan]
present+ Bryan_Sullivan
16:10:48 [anne]
16:10:56 [SamKim]
SamKim has joined #webapps
16:11:05 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: ... and there's the admn ...
16:11:14 [Josh_Soref]
... DOM Mutations - 11
16:11:15 [dcooney]
dcooney has joined #webapps
16:11:30 [JonathanJ]
Present+ Jonathan_Jeon
16:11:52 [Josh_Soref]
... XHR1 ... there was a notion (by anne ) should we give up on XHR1 and just spec XHR2
16:11:58 [Josh_Soref]
... do we want a time slot for that?
16:12:13 [Josh_Soref]
[ no one expresses interest ]
16:12:25 [Josh_Soref]
anne: not even me, i think we can just do it in a few minutes
16:12:34 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: let's do it during the pubstatus time slot today
16:12:38 [Josh_Soref]
... XHR1 - 0
16:12:38 [chaals]
Present+ Marcos, Robin
16:12:40 [wayne_carr]
wayne_carr has joined #webapps
16:12:51 [Josh_Soref]
... DOM Parsing and Serialization
16:13:01 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: do we want to formally add it to webapps when we recharter?
16:13:26 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: is there a slot for DOM4?
16:14:01 [Josh_Soref]
[ DOM4 would be in generic chartering ]
16:14:03 [Josh_Soref]
... DOM Parsing and Serialization - 0
16:14:14 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: is aryeh here?
16:14:25 [wangsi-wei]
wangsi-wei has joined #webapps
16:14:28 [Josh_Soref]
... HTML Editing API - 0
16:14:35 [Josh_Soref]
[ to be done in chartering ]
16:14:45 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: is Ian F here?
16:14:56 [Josh_Soref]
... Storage Quota - 0
16:15:18 [Josh_Soref]
... API Design ...
16:15:19 [chaals] -> Storage quota API
16:15:30 [Josh_Soref]
... -- Robin had put together a rough outline
16:15:50 [Ms2ger]
16:16:09 [Josh_Soref]
... API Design - 16
16:16:32 [Josh_Soref]
... Stream API proposal (from Microsoft, that Adrian sent to the list)
16:16:45 [plh]
plh has joined #webapps
16:16:49 [Josh_Soref]
... -- and File API
16:16:54 [Josh_Soref]
... Stream API and File API - 10
16:16:57 [Ms2ger]
16:17:37 [Josh_Soref]
... Index DB - 5
16:17:47 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate plh
16:17:58 [bryan]
Proposal for discussion of server-sent events extension for connectionless push support:
16:18:06 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', Ms2ger. Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:18:19 [Josh_Soref]
/me thanks Ms2ger
16:18:24 [darobin]
darobin has joined #webapps
16:18:30 [Josh_Soref]
s!/me thanks Ms2ger !!
16:18:51 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: proposal by bryan to add a slot for server sent event extensions
16:18:58 [Josh_Soref]
... Server Sent Event Extensions - 4
16:19:11 [bernd]
bernd has joined #webapps
16:19:37 [chaals]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:19:37 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate chaals
16:20:10 [bernd]
bernd has left #webapps
16:20:20 [Josh_Soref]
s/Zakim: [IPcaller] is Olli_Pettay//
16:20:32 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:20:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
16:21:33 [Marcos]
Marcos has joined #webapps
16:22:15 [Josh_Soref]
[ Scribe takes a break while ArtB resequences things on screen unsaved in Wiki TPAC2011 ]
16:22:46 [Josh_Soref]
s|/me thanks Ms2ger ||
16:22:50 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:22:50 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
16:23:06 [Josh_Soref]
s|!/me thanks Ms2ger !!||
16:23:09 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:23:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
16:23:11 [Ms2ger]
16:23:31 [dcooney]
dcooney has joined #webapps
16:23:32 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:23:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
16:24:11 [Josh_Soref]
s/me thanks Ms2ger//
16:24:12 [Josh_Soref]
s/me thanks Ms2ger//
16:24:20 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:24:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
16:24:52 [Ms2ger]
s|!/ !!||
16:24:59 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:24:59 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
16:25:15 [Ms2ger]
16:25:19 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:25:19 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
16:25:21 [dino]
dino has joined #webapps
16:26:01 [aizu]
aizu has joined #webapps
16:26:47 [nvbalaji]
nvbalaji has joined #webapps
16:26:55 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:26:55 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
16:27:55 [Ms2ger]
16:27:59 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:27:59 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
16:28:09 [jdaggett_]
jdaggett_ has joined #webapps
16:28:12 [Josh_Soref]
[ ArtB commits Schedule to Wiki -- ]
16:28:26 [Josh_Soref]
anne: I need to leave, but we should talk about CORS
16:28:47 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: CORS has been important... so important that a WG has been made for it
16:29:03 [Ms2ger]
Topic: Spec status and plans
16:29:12 [Josh_Soref]
... Web Application Security Working Group
16:30:41 [Josh_Soref]
[ Scribe takes a break while anne outlines the history of the creation of that group with a dose of skepticism ]
16:31:56 [chaals]
Josh: There are a couple of community groups created to edit a spec, so maybe stuff gets done in community groups and webapps gets used to handle formal publishing for it.
16:32:06 [Josh_Soref]
16:32:36 [MoZ]
MoZ has joined #webapps
16:34:20 [Josh_Soref]
[ ArtB reviews pub status ]
16:34:34 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: do we need to add an Errata to DOM Core?
16:35:01 [Josh_Soref]
[ Chatter about Element Traversal and DOM4 ]
16:35:06 [Marcos]
16:35:37 [Josh_Soref]
DRAFT ACTION: Barstow work with Doug
16:35:41 [anne]
16:35:48 [anne]
^ same thing
16:36:13 [chaals]
AvK/Shepazu: Element traversal to point towards DOM4 as where the future work gets done (e.g. errata)
16:37:07 [chaals]
ACTION: Art to talk to Doug about the traversal from Element Traversal to DOM4
16:37:08 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-628 - Talk to Doug about the traversal from Element Traversal to DOM4 [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-11-07].
16:37:18 [Josh_Soref]
Eric: File APIs and Directory
16:37:28 [Josh_Soref]
... there are some bigger and smaller changes coming
16:37:40 [Josh_Soref]
... implementation status is not up to date
16:37:53 [Josh_Soref]
... chrome only, but it's more implemented
16:38:09 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: can any other implementers speak about Writer and Directories and systems?
16:38:20 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: we have an implementation because we internally use it
16:38:27 [Josh_Soref]
... we want to get it done
16:38:30 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #webapps
16:38:33 [Josh_Soref]
... right now we ship our own
16:38:36 [smaug]
Isn't it still unclear whether we need the whole Directories stuff
16:38:36 [Josh_Soref]
... we expect it to change
16:38:43 [smaug]
(ah, sicking is talking)
16:39:06 [Josh_Soref]
jonas: we have plans
16:39:17 [Josh_Soref]
macie: apple has plans
16:39:26 [Ms2ger]
Present+ Jonas Sicking
16:39:35 [Josh_Soref]
anne: I think apple's position is more in line with the last two
16:39:42 [adrianba]
adrianba has joined #webapps
16:39:42 [Josh_Soref]
s/Jonas Sicking/Jonas_Sicking/
16:40:18 [weinig]
Josh_Soref: I'm not macie, Sam Weinig
16:40:18 [Josh_Soref]
eric: File Saver ...
16:40:30 [Josh_Soref]
16:40:36 [dglazkov]
dglazkov has joined #webapps
16:40:38 [Josh_Soref]
s/Josh_Soref: I'm not macie, Sam Weinig//
16:40:45 [weinig]
Josh_Soref: it's ok
16:40:52 [Josh_Soref]
s/Josh_Soref: it's ok//
16:41:06 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: From Origin header ...
16:41:16 [Josh_Soref]
... what's the implementation status?
16:41:26 [Josh_Soref]
anne: I don't think anyone has implemented it
16:41:31 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Progress Events ...
16:41:45 [Josh_Soref]
anne: I think the main thing blocking implementations is Constructor
16:42:00 [Josh_Soref]
... I guess WebKit has that
16:42:16 [noriya]
noriya has joined #webapps
16:42:31 [Josh_Soref]
anne: it's fairly simple (just properties/methods) since dispatch is covered in other specs
16:42:49 [slightlyoff]
slightlyoff has joined #webapps
16:42:51 [Josh_Soref]
jonas: we haven't started on constructors, since it's non trivial
16:42:59 [Josh_Soref]
... probably somewhat soon, but next year
16:43:03 [Josh_Soref]
anne: similar for us
16:43:09 [Josh_Soref]
... it's easier but not a priority
16:43:12 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Selectors
16:43:48 [morrita]
morrita has joined #webapps
16:43:59 [Josh_Soref]
... it's blocked by WebIDL
16:44:05 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: is WebIDL going to be a topic
16:44:23 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: there's a slot available and heycam is sitting next to you :)
16:44:28 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Sever Sent Events
16:44:35 [Ms2ger]
16:44:49 [Josh_Soref]
... when I left Boston, we were down to 0 bugs
16:44:55 [Josh_Soref]
anne: it doesn't cover Cross Origin
16:45:16 [Josh_Soref]
... and anne-xxx-something-else
16:45:30 [Josh_Soref]
... It's going to get another argument in the constructor to cover cross origin
16:45:58 [sicking]
sicking has joined #webapps
16:46:08 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: the main thing is that changes are coming, so it doesn't make sense to go to LC
16:46:09 [chaals]
s/and anne-xxx-something-else//
16:46:26 [MikeSmith]
RRSAgent, make minutes
16:46:26 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate MikeSmith
16:46:27 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: WebIDL
16:46:38 [Josh_Soref]
... it had LC2
16:46:58 [chaals]
s/to cover cross cross origin/to cover cross origin and opting in to credentials exchange/
16:47:03 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: there are some non controversial issues
16:47:31 [Josh_Soref]
... and then a question of whether it should be less non JS specific
16:47:33 [jcantera]
jcantera has joined #webapps
16:47:38 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: we have a slot for tomorrow at 4
16:47:46 [anne]
EventSource will get the same cross-origin story as XMLHttpRequest basically
16:47:48 [anne]
is what I said
16:48:02 [anne]
and everyone is on board, change just needs to be made (well everyone that voiced an opinion)
16:48:09 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: PostMessage
16:49:10 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:49:10 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
16:49:48 [R_Berkoff]
R_Berkoff has joined #webapps
16:49:51 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Web Workers
16:50:01 [Ms2ger]
s|s/Josh_Soref: I'm not macie, Sam Weinig//||
16:50:07 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:50:07 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
16:51:18 [darin]
darin has joined #webapps
16:51:33 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Marcos: widgets...?
16:51:48 [Josh_Soref]
... widget interface is blocked by webidl and webstorage
16:52:02 [Josh_Soref]
... i think W3 Team has agreed on changes to pub reqs re:HTML5
16:52:51 [Josh_Soref]
... update had been stalled ... PAG has been active recently, and there's reason to believe that the PAG will conclude relatively soon
16:52:57 [kensaku]
kensaku has joined #webapps
16:53:07 [lgombos]
lgombos has joined #webapps
16:53:55 [Josh_Soref]
[ Marcos gives a summary ]
16:54:20 [Josh_Soref]
dom: is there an eta for the report?
16:54:32 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: shortly after TPAC, it needs a bit of clean up
16:54:36 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: there is a draft
16:54:44 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: DigSig (for Widgets)
16:54:57 [Josh_Soref]
... that spec is in PR, it's blocked by XML Sec PAG
16:55:15 [Josh_Soref]
... Widget URI moved back to WD in September
16:55:27 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: trying to align it with File API... responding as a fake http server
16:55:36 [Josh_Soref]
... hopefully it'll have fairly similar behavior
16:55:52 [Josh_Soref]
... and move to LC
16:56:07 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: View Mode media feature is in PR
16:56:19 [Josh_Soref]
... and will move to Rec when Media Queries advances to PR
16:57:02 [Josh_Soref]
... Widget Updates
16:57:31 [Josh_Soref]
s/update had/Warp had/
16:57:39 [Josh_Soref]
16:57:46 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:57:46 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
16:58:29 [lgombos__]
lgombos__ has joined #webapps
16:58:39 [lgombos]
lgombos has joined #webapps
17:00:18 [Josh_Soref]
[ Break until 10:30a ]
17:01:40 [chaals]
rrsagent, draft minutes
17:01:40 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate chaals
17:04:45 [Zakim]
17:07:47 [davida]
davida has joined #webapps
17:08:05 [shanec]
shanec has joined #webapps
17:16:23 [dveditz]
dveditz has joined #webapps
17:17:12 [ed]
ed has joined #webapps
17:19:52 [richt]
richt has joined #webapps
17:21:37 [cyril]
cyril has joined #webapps
17:25:03 [sangwhan]
sangwhan has joined #webapps
17:25:24 [a12u]
a12u has joined #webapps
17:26:44 [shanec]
shanec has joined #webapps
17:28:21 [jrossi2]
jrossi2 has joined #webapps
17:28:30 [magnus]
magnus has joined #webapps
17:30:21 [Kihong_Kwon]
Kihong_Kwon has joined #webapps
17:30:49 [a12u_]
a12u_ has joined #webapps
17:31:53 [anne]
anne has joined #webapps
17:34:08 [darobin]
darobin has joined #webapps
17:35:11 [dowan]
dowan has joined #webapps
17:35:34 [myakura]
myakura has joined #webapps
17:41:04 [dino]
dino has joined #webapps
17:41:04 [shanec]
shanec has joined #webapps
17:41:08 [jrossi2]
jrossi2 has joined #webapps
17:41:10 [pererik]
pererik has joined #webapps
17:41:12 [adrianba]
adrianba has joined #webapps
17:41:33 [abarsto]
abarsto has joined #webapps
17:41:34 [richt]
richt has joined #webapps
17:41:35 [JonathanJ]
JonathanJ has joined #webapps
17:41:35 [wangsi-wei]
wangsi-wei has joined #webapps
17:41:38 [hayato]
hayato has joined #webapps
17:41:38 [sicking]
sicking has joined #webapps
17:41:40 [darobin]
darobin has joined #webapps
17:41:47 [Kai]
Kai has joined #webapps
17:41:54 [sangwhan]
sangwhan has joined #webapps
17:41:54 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #webapps
17:42:00 [jdaggett_]
jdaggett_ has joined #webapps
17:42:00 [karl]
karl has joined #webapps
17:42:12 [stakagi]
stakagi has joined #webapps
17:42:14 [myakura]
myakura has joined #webapps
17:42:21 [weinig]
weinig has joined #webapps
17:42:59 [cyril]
cyril has joined #webapps
17:43:37 [Ms2ger]
17:43:59 [Ruinan]
Ruinan has joined #webapps
17:44:01 [a12u_]
a12u_ has joined #webapps
17:44:06 [dom]
dom has joined #webapps
17:45:26 [Ruinan_]
Ruinan_ has joined #webapps
17:45:29 [Kihong_Kwon]
Kihong_Kwon has joined #webapps
17:48:36 [shanec]
shanec has joined #webapps
17:49:54 [shanec]
shanec has joined #webapps
17:49:55 [dcooney]
dcooney has joined #webapps
17:50:15 [a12u]
a12u has joined #webapps
17:50:24 [Kihong_Kwon]
Kihong_Kwon has joined #webapps
17:50:37 [ihilerio]
ihilerio has joined #webapps
17:51:14 [ihilerio]
Present+ israelh
17:51:46 [samkim]
samkim has joined #webapps
17:52:52 [dowan]
dowan has joined #webapps
17:53:27 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, make minutes
17:53:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ArtB
17:55:51 [rniwa]
rniwa has joined #webapps
17:58:28 [wangsi-wei]
wangsi-wei has joined #webapps
17:58:35 [Ruinan]
Ruinan has joined #webapps
18:00:19 [rniwa]
rniwa has joined #webapps
18:01:11 [hoashi]
hoashi has joined #webapps
18:01:27 [Ms2ger]
Not 11 either, apparently
18:02:02 [a12u_]
a12u_ has joined #webapps
18:02:03 [kensaku]
kensaku has joined #webapps
18:02:46 [jcdufourd]
jcdufourd has joined #webapps
18:03:10 [khoashi]
khoashi has joined #webapps
18:03:17 [stakagi]
stakagi has joined #webapps
18:04:01 [Marcos]
Marcos has joined #webapps
18:04:12 [Josh_Soref]
[ We're about to resume ]
18:04:24 [lgombos]
lgombos has joined #webapps
18:04:24 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: we have 3 or 4 WGs here
18:04:33 [Josh_Soref]
... ask that observers make room around the table for WG members
18:04:56 [anne]
anne has joined #webapps
18:05:07 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #webapps
18:05:17 [JohnJansen]
JohnJansen has joined #webapps
18:05:22 [Rossen]
Rossen has joined #webapps
18:05:24 [bkihara]
bkihara has joined #webapps
18:05:28 [jongyoul]
jongyoul has joined #webapps
18:05:43 [hayato]
hayato has joined #webapps
18:05:44 [Josh_Soref]
[ ArtB introduces ]
18:06:01 [tobie]
tobie has joined #webapps
18:06:13 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #webapps
18:06:15 [dbaron]
[joint meeting of Web Apps, Web App Security, Web Fonts, and CSS]
18:06:19 [chaals]
chaals has joined #webapps
18:06:26 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: CORS
18:06:27 [sangwhan]
sangwhan has joined #webapps
18:06:32 [chaals]
rrsagent, draft minutes
18:06:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate chaals
18:06:34 [darin]
darin has joined #webapps
18:06:46 [Josh_Soref]
[ ArtB introduces the groups who have dependencies on CORS ]
18:06:57 [magnus]
magnus has joined #webapps
18:06:57 [dino]
dino has joined #webapps
18:07:06 [Josh_Soref]
vladimir: It started with the development of the Web Open Font Spec
18:07:13 [Josh_Soref]
... when CORS was selected
18:07:27 [Josh_Soref]
... but the comment was made that it isn't specific to Web Font
18:07:41 [Josh_Soref]
... and it was suggested to make the Same Origin specification be made on a link specific basis
18:07:48 [jcantera]
jcantera has joined #webapps
18:07:48 [glazou]
glazou has joined #webapps
18:07:55 [Bert]
Bert has joined #webapps
18:08:01 [Josh_Soref]
s/CORS was selected/same origin was selected/
18:08:03 [nvbalaji]
nvbalaji has joined #webapps
18:08:20 [Josh_Soref]
... The requirement was marked as at-risk
18:08:24 [Josh_Soref]
... and moved toward CSS
18:08:32 [Tom]
Tom has joined #webapps
18:08:34 [stearns]
stearns has joined #webapps
18:08:39 [shan]
shan has joined #webapps
18:08:48 [anne]
same-origin policy
18:08:48 [wangsi-wei]
wangsi-wei has joined #webapps
18:08:51 [anne]
From-Origin header
18:08:53 [plinss]
plinss has joined #webapps
18:08:57 [ernesto_jimenez]
ernesto_jimenez has joined #webapps
18:09:02 [yoiwa]
yoiwa has joined #webapps
18:09:03 [Eliot]
Eliot has joined #webapps
18:09:07 [cslye]
cslye has joined #webapps
18:09:09 [weinig]
weinig has joined #webapps
18:09:10 [ArtB]
From-Origin spec:
18:09:17 [Josh_Soref]
... CSS needs ot decide which to use to relax the restriction
18:09:25 [Josh_Soref]
jdaggett_: I'm the editor of the CSS Fonts Spec
18:09:36 [Josh_Soref]
... the spec today says fonts are same-origin by default with CORS to relax it
18:09:42 [Josh_Soref]
... the question is what's the mechanism
18:09:46 [Josh_Soref]
... should it be From-Origin
18:09:52 [Eliot]
Eliot has joined #webapps
18:09:53 [Josh_Soref]
... and people who put a font on their server
18:10:07 [Josh_Soref]
... should people use CORS to relax it?
18:10:15 [Josh_Soref]
... there's a fundamental issu
18:10:22 [Josh_Soref]
18:10:22 [morrita]
morrita has joined #webapps
18:10:30 [sangwhan]
artb: yes
18:10:31 [Josh_Soref]
... From-Origin/CORS
18:10:35 [tcelik]
tcelik has joined #webapps
18:10:37 [Josh_Soref]
s/artb: yes//
18:10:38 [smfr]
smfr has joined #webapps
18:11:00 [Josh_Soref]
jdaggett_: If I say "allow all origins" (with CORS) and "from-origin same"
18:11:07 [Josh_Soref]
... how do they mesh together?
18:11:12 [Josh_Soref]
anne: From-Origin would Win
18:11:13 [tcelik]
greetings (CSSWG member, representative from Mozilla Foundation).
18:11:27 [Josh_Soref]
... From-Origin integrates with the fetch algorithm
18:11:29 [mollydotcom]
mollydotcom has joined #webapps
18:11:49 [Josh_Soref]
tab: From- would stop it first
18:12:06 [Josh_Soref]
anne: yes, CORS would just see a fault and couldn't do anything to unfault it
18:12:19 [Kai]
Kai has joined #webapps
18:12:21 [Josh_Soref]
anne: everything that fetches should be defined in terms of the fetch algoritm
18:12:32 [Josh_Soref]
... that's a bug in the fonts spec, it doesn't reference the fetch algorithm
18:12:43 [noriya]
noriya has joined #webapps
18:12:49 [Josh_Soref]
clilly: could you provide text?
18:13:02 [heycam]
18:13:05 [krisk]
krisk has joined #webapps
18:13:10 [DKA]
DKA has joined #webapps
18:13:32 [Josh_Soref]
anne: the CORS specification requires specific invocation of the request algorithm
18:13:48 [Gopal]
Gopal has joined #webapps
18:13:50 [spoussa]
spoussa has joined #webapps
18:13:55 [Josh_Soref]
jdaggett_: so any spec with a same-origin restriction needs to have specific text?
18:13:56 [Josh_Soref]
anne: yes
18:14:08 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:14:08 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
18:14:30 [Josh_Soref]
clilley: the host language has to invoke the fetch algorithm in order to trigger it
18:14:46 [Josh_Soref]
anne: the specification [CORS] specifically lists the text to trigger invocation
18:14:47 [Ms2ger]
s/needs ot/needs to/
18:14:48 [cyril]
cyril has joined #webapps
18:14:58 [hayato]
hayato has joined #webapps
18:15:08 [mmielke]
mmielke has joined #webapps
18:15:09 [Soonho]
Soonho has joined #webapps
18:15:12 [florian]
florian has joined #webapps
18:15:14 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: Maybe we should have a FAQ somewhere for how to integration
18:15:22 [SungOk_You]
SungOk_You has joined #webapps
18:15:23 [Josh_Soref]
weinig: Section 8 of CORS has this text
18:15:26 [ArtB]
18:15:36 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: do you have specs that use it?
18:15:39 [chaals] -> advice on using CORS in other specs
18:15:40 [Josh_Soref]
anne: HTML and XHR
18:15:59 [dbaron]
(should we move back to the main topic?)
18:16:00 [Josh_Soref]
anne: it is quite intricate
18:16:20 [Josh_Soref]
... since there are credentials and other things
18:16:32 [chaals]
q+ tab
18:16:36 [Josh_Soref]
... if you have a model that sends credentials by default
18:16:38 [glazou]
ArtB: let's focus back on main topic please
18:16:45 [Josh_Soref]
... and you want to do something else
18:16:53 [Josh_Soref]
... XHR uses a withCredentials attribute
18:17:08 [Josh_Soref]
... HTMLxxx has something else
18:17:18 [Josh_Soref]
jdaggett_: that isn't the most important topic
18:17:25 [chaals]
q+ sicking
18:17:31 [chaals]
ack tab
18:17:48 [Josh_Soref]
tab: you have a paragraph that says anyone wanting to use CORS
18:17:58 [Josh_Soref]
... must specifically reference the algorithm and set particular variables
18:18:06 [Josh_Soref]
... what would be helpful is specific example text
18:18:17 [Josh_Soref]
ACTION tab to write proposed text
18:18:18 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - tab
18:18:53 [Josh_Soref]
anne: we have two specifications which do things differently because it's rather different for different environments
18:19:04 [chaals]
q+ marcos
18:19:23 [Josh_Soref]
18:19:28 [Josh_Soref]
ack sicking
18:19:30 [chaals]
ack sicking
18:19:37 [Marcos]
ack marcos
18:19:40 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: one of the issues specifically about fonts
18:19:42 [stpeter]
stpeter has joined #webapps
18:19:44 [MoZ]
MoZ has joined #webapps
18:19:54 [Josh_Soref]
... is the whole thing about whether it makes sense about embedable
18:20:10 [Josh_Soref]
... and there's the question about exposing the resource to the embedder
18:20:22 [Josh_Soref]
... Can we skip the embedding and just make it readable to the world
18:20:42 [Josh_Soref]
... Any time we've tried to expose a resource without letting the page see the resource, we've failed
18:20:54 [Josh_Soref]
... e.g. with images we leaked image dimensions to the web page
18:20:58 [mjs]
mjs has joined #webapps
18:21:07 [Josh_Soref]
... with WebGL, we accidentally leaked pixel data through a timing channel
18:21:22 [Josh_Soref]
... it's possible you can leak other data from transparency
18:21:44 [Josh_Soref]
... with fonts it's even more likely since you can get information from timing
18:21:56 [dbaron]
18:22:03 [chaals]
q+ florian
18:22:09 [chaals]
q+ chrisL
18:22:14 [Josh_Soref]
... can we say that fonts are inherently non private and we can share with anyone on the web?
18:22:17 [Josh_Soref]
18:22:20 [Josh_Soref]
ack dbaron
18:22:22 [chaals]
ack florian
18:22:36 [Josh_Soref]
florian: the answer is that in general fonts do not contain private data
18:22:44 [sriramyadavalli]
sriramyadavalli has joined #webapps
18:22:44 [Josh_Soref]
... it seems that people believe that in some edge cases they do
18:23:01 [morrita]
morrita has joined #webapps
18:23:28 [chaals]
q+ dbaron
18:23:29 [Josh_Soref]
... the font itself doesn't contain private data, but the presence does indicate that the product exists
18:23:39 [tcelik]
q+ tabatkins
18:23:40 [Josh_Soref]
... it doesn't seem necessary to restrict by default
18:23:45 [Josh_Soref]
clilley: i agree in general
18:23:53 [Josh_Soref]
... a WOFF font can contain licensee and licensor
18:23:58 [Josh_Soref]
... it's not quite private
18:24:03 [Josh_Soref]
... but that's leakable
18:24:10 [Josh_Soref]
... i believe that form-origin is appropriate
18:24:11 [Josh_Soref]
ack dbaron
18:24:12 [chaals]
q+ sam
18:24:19 [Josh_Soref]
dbaron: one other case with private data
18:24:22 [Josh_Soref]
... is font-subset
18:24:26 [Josh_Soref]
... which is common with EOT
18:24:35 [Josh_Soref]
... and it's likely we'll get that for WOFF
18:24:35 [nicksoba]
nicksoba has joined #webapps
18:24:48 [sicking]
18:24:55 [Josh_Soref]
... and if you subset for WOFF specifically to a page
18:24:59 [chaals]
ack chr
18:25:01 [Josh_Soref]
... then you leak the contents of the page
18:25:07 [chaals]
ack tab
18:25:11 [DKA]
DKA has joined #webapps
18:25:17 [Josh_Soref]
tab: the distinction on the table
18:25:25 [Josh_Soref]
... is whether an embedded resource
18:25:30 [Josh_Soref]
... embedding-vs-reading
18:25:45 [Josh_Soref]
dbaron: the argument jonas made is that every time we tried to make that distinction, we've failed
18:25:54 [Josh_Soref]
tab: right, can we say "embedding means reading"
18:25:54 [nicksoba_]
nicksoba_ has joined #webapps
18:25:56 [mjs]
18:25:58 [YUMA]
YUMA has joined #webapps
18:26:00 [chaals]
q+ johnd
18:26:01 [R_Berkoff]
R_Berkoff has joined #webapps
18:26:02 [Josh_Soref]
... because we've failed each and every time we've tried
18:26:14 [sicking]
18:26:15 [chaals]
ack sam
18:26:18 [Josh_Soref]
weinig: leaking licensee/licensors...
18:26:28 [Josh_Soref]
... while i understand that we leak some info
18:26:33 [Josh_Soref]
... how would we leak licensee/licensor?
18:27:02 [Josh_Soref]
clilley: that only happens if you don't make the distinction between reading and embedding
18:27:13 [Josh_Soref]
... there is an extension for firefox that enables that through an internal api
18:27:25 [Josh_Soref]
weinig: is that available to webcontent?
18:27:39 [Josh_Soref]
clilley: it isn't available to web content (only chrome)
18:27:44 [sicking]
18:27:48 [Josh_Soref]
weinig: you obviously could mask some things
18:27:57 [Josh_Soref]
... the non visual elements are easily maskable
18:28:13 [Josh_Soref]
vladimir: the way i understand tab's argument
18:28:25 [Josh_Soref]
... is that each time we make the distinction between embedding/reading
18:28:33 [Josh_Soref]
... is that it's easier to not do it
18:28:44 [Josh_Soref]
... i don't see why embedding-origin is the simple approach
18:28:49 [Josh_Soref]
18:28:56 [Josh_Soref]
ack mjs
18:29:01 [chaals]
ack mj
18:29:08 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: a couple of people have claimed that reading/embedding distinctions have always failed
18:29:17 [Josh_Soref]
... i bet none of you would make all images world readable
18:29:25 [Josh_Soref]
... the fact is that there is still a distinction
18:29:33 [Josh_Soref]
... when it's too easy, we usually consider it a security bug
18:29:36 [Josh_Soref]
... and try to fix it
18:29:47 [Josh_Soref]
... it's true that it's hard to maintain that distinction
18:30:01 [Josh_Soref]
... i think people are wrongly trying to make the claim that there is no distinction
18:30:01 [chaals]
q+ chrisl
18:30:05 [Josh_Soref]
ack jdaggett_
18:30:07 [anne]
and also for new ones such as video
18:30:07 [chaals]
ack j
18:30:07 [chsiao]
chsiao has joined #webapps
18:30:16 [Josh_Soref]
jdaggett_: we're not in the same case as images
18:30:19 [Josh_Soref]
... this is a new resource time
18:30:22 [Josh_Soref]
18:30:27 [Josh_Soref]
... we can define a behavior
18:30:33 [Josh_Soref]
... with fonts, there are any number of ways
18:30:35 [darin]
darin has joined #webapps
18:30:40 [Josh_Soref]
... you can't do the type of tainting with canvas
18:30:41 [arronei]
arronei has joined #webapps
18:30:51 [Josh_Soref]
... with fonts, you can infer character set, or metrics, or ...
18:31:00 [Josh_Soref]
... trying to analyze all of the apis is too hard
18:31:05 [Josh_Soref]
... back to what jonas said
18:31:14 [Josh_Soref]
... if we define that all cases are readable
18:31:19 [wayne_carr]
wayne_carr has joined #webapps
18:31:22 [Josh_Soref]
... maybe we make it by default origin restriction
18:31:24 [Josh_Soref]
18:31:29 [Josh_Soref]
ack chr
18:31:47 [Josh_Soref]
clilley: the claim is made that for fonts that we don't make the distinction for embedding-reading
18:31:54 [Josh_Soref]
dbaron: i probably made the claim too strongly
18:32:15 [chaals]
ack sicking
18:32:18 [Josh_Soref]
clilley: and i interpreted this for fonts that we shouldn't be doing it
18:32:20 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:32:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
18:32:30 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: for browser vendors, the pain is addressing security issues
18:32:33 [nicksoba]
nicksoba has joined #webapps
18:32:34 [Josh_Soref]
... instead of working on features
18:32:41 [dbaron]
dbaron: ... and instead of saying it always failed, should have said it either always failed or led to lots of pain trying to prevent it from failing
18:32:46 [Josh_Soref]
... for images, we now have an api where we have to add this tainting thing
18:32:53 [Josh_Soref]
... if we had CORS on images from the beginning
18:32:59 [Josh_Soref]
... we'd probably have more mashupable
18:33:15 [Josh_Soref]
... we don't because 3rd parties can't get this stuff easily
18:33:29 [Josh_Soref]
... we won't expose license info for similar reasons
18:34:35 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: if sites can opt into with shared by default
18:34:52 [Josh_Soref]
s/... for images/sicking: for images/
18:35:00 [Josh_Soref]
... if people have to make a decision by adding cors headers
18:35:06 [Josh_Soref]
... then they'll actively make the decision
18:35:19 [Josh_Soref]
... then they'll go through a security review
18:35:37 [Josh_Soref]
... if they don't have to go through a security review (putting up CORS), they won't think about it
18:35:40 [Josh_Soref]
18:35:52 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: anne are you coming up with additional constraints?
18:36:00 [Josh_Soref]
... is this more UC clarification?
18:36:10 [chaals]
q+ chrisl
18:36:10 [Josh_Soref]
anne: there's nothing that needs to be changed in CORS or Form-Origin
18:36:25 [Ms2ger]
18:36:27 [Josh_Soref]
... the question is if Fonts should work like Images or XHR
18:36:37 [Josh_Soref]
... and i stopped caring a long time ago
18:36:46 [Josh_Soref]
tab: so john, make a decision
18:36:48 [chaals]
ack ch
18:36:54 [chaals]
q+ vladimir
18:36:55 [Josh_Soref]
clilley: where are we in the process
18:37:09 [Josh_Soref]
... are both CORS and From-Origin is in where?
18:37:17 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: CORS is a joint from Sec+WebApps
18:37:23 [Josh_Soref]
... F-O is in Sec only
18:37:36 [Josh_Soref]
... I saw Brad walk in
18:37:50 [Josh_Soref]
clilley: follow up, where are the issue lists for these specs?
18:37:55 [Josh_Soref]
... pointer?
18:38:00 [Josh_Soref]
18:38:13 [Josh_Soref]
BradL: CoChairing Web Apps Sec WG
18:38:33 [Josh_Soref]
... Web Apps Sec is co delivering it with Web Apps to drive it through
18:38:42 [Josh_Soref]
... to keep IPR grants
18:38:48 [Josh_Soref]
... there are some small issues
18:38:53 [Josh_Soref]
... including Best Practices
18:39:05 [Josh_Soref]
... additionally our tracker has some other small issues
18:39:09 [Josh_Soref]
... which we may move to bugzilla
18:39:18 [Josh_Soref]
... the primary issue before REC is a test suite
18:39:20 [ArtB]
CORS: bugs:
18:39:24 [Josh_Soref]
... anne is working on it
18:39:32 [Josh_Soref]
... we're new so we'll be meeting with Staff
18:39:38 [Tom]
Tom has joined #webapps
18:39:39 [Josh_Soref]
clilley: and for F-O?
18:39:49 [Josh_Soref]
BradL: that's not in our charter
18:39:56 [Josh_Soref]
q+ to ask where it is
18:40:18 [chaals]
ack jo
18:40:18 [Zakim]
Josh_Soref, you wanted to ask where it is
18:40:24 [Josh_Soref]
18:40:24 [nicksoba_]
nicksoba_ has joined #webapps
18:40:27 [ArtB]
18:40:27 [chaals]
ack vla
18:40:45 [Josh_Soref]
vladimir: from everything i've heard so far, we seem to lean to same-origin with CORS
18:40:58 [Josh_Soref]
... and my question was the same as clilley's - already answered
18:41:05 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: we seem to be leaning that way
18:41:16 [Josh_Soref]
... How many people Same Origin by default
18:41:18 [Tom]
Tom has joined #webapps
18:42:01 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:42:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
18:42:12 [Josh_Soref]
... Same-Origin - 25
18:42:51 [Josh_Soref]
... Against Same-Origin - 8
18:43:00 [Josh_Soref]
18:43:21 [Josh_Soref]
clilley: follow on question ...
18:43:43 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: is this a strong objection, if we resolved to use Same Origin, would you argue, or can you live with it?
18:43:54 [Ms2ger]
s/F-O is in Sec only/From-Origin is in WebApps only/
18:43:58 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:43:58 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
18:44:23 [Josh_Soref]
... if you can't live with that decision, justify why we should continue arguing
18:44:50 [Josh_Soref]
Bert: for Fonts, i really like the restriction to be on a higher level than the protocol
18:44:57 [Josh_Soref]
... something that isn't http
18:45:02 [chaals]
q+ tab
18:45:09 [Josh_Soref]
... for animations
18:45:12 [Josh_Soref]
ack tab
18:45:13 [chaals]
ack tab
18:45:21 [Josh_Soref]
tab: i don't believe this is restricted to any protocol
18:45:46 [Josh_Soref]
[ jdagget points out to tab that CORS is http ]
18:46:02 [Josh_Soref]
[ and clilley explains that you can reference ftp resources ]
18:46:08 [chaals]
q+ jonas
18:46:10 [Josh_Soref]
Adam: that's a general problem with CORS everywhere
18:46:17 [Josh_Soref]
... when we introduce other protocols
18:46:23 [Josh_Soref]
... we'll demand that they support CORS
18:46:24 [dbaron]
(Adam == Adam Barth)
18:46:29 [Josh_Soref]
tab: and patch ftp
18:46:35 [chaals]
ack jo
18:46:39 [Josh_Soref]
Bert: How about email?
18:46:46 [Josh_Soref]
anne: how do you envision?
18:46:59 [Josh_Soref]
Bert: anything with a url must have a
18:47:08 [Josh_Soref]
anne: so emails include fonts?
18:47:14 [Josh_Soref]
Bert: yes
18:47:19 [Josh_Soref]
anne: then they're same origin
18:47:25 [Josh_Soref]
Bert: what about bittorrent?
18:47:29 [Ms2ger]
s/Adam:/Adam Barth:/
18:47:31 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:47:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
18:47:31 [mjs]
18:47:49 [chaals]
q+ sicking
18:47:53 [Josh_Soref]
vladimir: if you want to make it available across origins, then you could do it?
18:48:00 [chaals]
q+ chris
18:48:13 [Josh_Soref]
ack mjs
18:48:13 [fantasai]
fantasai has joined #webapps
18:48:14 [chaals]
ack mjs
18:48:21 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: email messages might have a same-origin problem
18:48:35 [Josh_Soref]
... the main resource comes from mid: and cid:
18:48:43 [Josh_Soref]
s/and/and sub resources come from/
18:48:46 [chaals]
ack si
18:48:56 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: any protocol that people are starting to more actively use
18:49:07 [Josh_Soref]
... people are going to have to deal with cross origin issues
18:49:10 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, make minutes
18:49:10 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ArtB
18:49:27 [Josh_Soref]
... anyone that wants to seriously start doing web deployment over other protocols will have to define how this works
18:49:38 [chaals]
18:49:42 [Josh_Soref]
Bert: the protocol is not important, it's the resource that's important
18:49:50 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: we've defined domains
18:50:01 [Josh_Soref]
... and said that everything in a domain is owned by the same person
18:50:11 [Josh_Soref]
... every other protocol will have to define something like that
18:50:14 [Josh_Soref]
Bert: that's a hack
18:50:16 [Josh_Soref]
18:50:19 [Josh_Soref]
ack chr
18:50:28 [Josh_Soref]
clilley: I agree that specific protocols saying
18:50:29 [Linuz]
Linuz has joined #webapps
18:50:37 [anne]
the web is a hack. film at 11
18:50:40 [Josh_Soref]
... that cids of a mid are the same as the mid
18:50:47 [Josh_Soref]
... that's not the question
18:50:50 [chaals]
18:50:53 [Josh_Soref]
... is there an objection
18:51:10 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: if the spec says that embedding fonts in email never works, i'd have to object
18:51:16 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: embedding stuff in email is a real thing
18:51:22 [Josh_Soref]
... it happens in Opera
18:51:27 [Josh_Soref]
... we have questions around that
18:51:34 [Josh_Soref]
... with images, do they automatically render?
18:51:40 [Josh_Soref]
... do you run JS from another source?
18:51:48 [Josh_Soref]
... the issue of clilley/Bert
18:51:58 [Josh_Soref]
... is do we make a protocol agnostic work
18:52:03 [Josh_Soref]
... but we live on HTTP
18:52:14 [Josh_Soref]
... we don't object to people expanding things to other protocols
18:52:20 [Josh_Soref]
... i agree with mjs
18:52:29 [Josh_Soref]
... if we say you're not allowed to embed things except in http resources
18:52:39 [Josh_Soref]
... that would be beyond what is reasonable for a spec
18:52:55 [Josh_Soref]
... (this is a personal position)
18:53:01 [Josh_Soref]
... clilley's question is
18:53:13 [Josh_Soref]
... do we have someone who objects to that proposal
18:53:22 [Josh_Soref]
... of us focusing on http
18:53:27 [jihye]
jihye has joined #webapps
18:53:34 [Josh_Soref]
... to Bert's objection
18:53:42 [Josh_Soref]
... that we have a hack, and forcing others to work with us
18:53:58 [Josh_Soref]
dom: people send newsletters in html
18:54:04 [dom]
18:54:16 [Josh_Soref]
... and they rely on w3c of sending fonts in emails
18:54:34 [Josh_Soref]
Florian: using http
18:54:43 [Josh_Soref]
... implicitly prevents other protocols from using it cross-origin
18:54:44 [richt]
richt has joined #webapps
18:54:47 [glazou]
18:54:56 [Josh_Soref]
jdaggett_: the wording is that cross origin is not allowed
18:55:01 [chaals]
q+ chris, sick
18:55:26 [Josh_Soref]
... unless explicitly relaxed using CORS
18:55:40 [anne]
I do think it should be defined for things that are fetched within a "browsing context" which is more than HTTP
18:55:41 [chaals]
ack ch
18:55:43 [Josh_Soref]
clilley: in the context of this question
18:55:49 [Josh_Soref]
... sure email is a case
18:56:04 [Josh_Soref]
... it would be possible to resolve cid: in CORS
18:56:17 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: it's a good idea to say if it's HTTP use CORS
18:56:17 [bhill2]
bhill2 has joined #webapps
18:56:30 [Josh_Soref]
... but for other protocols, fall back to their protocol for addressing this issue
18:56:36 [spoussa1]
spoussa1 has joined #webapps
18:56:57 [Josh_Soref]
Florian: if you're using HTTP then use CORS
18:57:12 [Josh_Soref]
... and saying if you're not HTTP then use the CORS equivalent
18:57:16 [Josh_Soref]
... is going too far
18:57:23 [Josh_Soref]
glazou: this is a problem
18:57:26 [yu1]
yu1 has joined #webapps
18:57:31 [Josh_Soref]
... because we don't know if there's an equivalent for other protocols
18:57:35 [Josh_Soref]
... we don't know their schedules
18:57:41 [Josh_Soref]
... this isn't reasonable
18:57:54 [Josh_Soref]
anne: what do you propose instead?
18:58:10 [alexmog]
alexmog has joined #webapps
18:58:12 [Josh_Soref]
glazou: the w3c has dealt in the past
18:58:36 [Josh_Soref]
... with protocols that do not belong to the web strictly
18:58:42 [Josh_Soref]
... we can deal with them later
18:58:52 [Josh_Soref]
vladimir: i don't think this should hold us
18:59:05 [Josh_Soref]
jdaggett_: Florian's point is that he wants to restrict it to Only http
18:59:13 [Josh_Soref]
... the wording now is 'same-origin' and leaves it at that
18:59:13 [chaals]
q+ florian
18:59:32 [chaals]
q+ zilles
18:59:34 [Josh_Soref]
Florian: do not speak about restrictions for not http
18:59:44 [chaals]
q+ anne
18:59:48 [Josh_Soref]
anne: there are 3 cases
18:59:51 [Josh_Soref]
.... same-origin
18:59:55 [Josh_Soref]
19:00:14 [chaals]
ack anne
19:00:29 [Josh_Soref]
... cross origin where the api fetching has http origin
19:00:49 [Josh_Soref]
... the scheme is not http and there's a cross origin for the other
19:01:04 [stearns]
stearns has joined #webapps
19:01:07 [Josh_Soref]
Florian: in the spec we're talking about
19:01:16 [chaals]
ack fl
19:01:20 [Josh_Soref]
... we say 'for http do this, cross origin use CORS'
19:01:35 [Josh_Soref]
... we leave it up in the air
19:01:42 [Josh_Soref]
... for a later version or another group/spec
19:01:43 [Josh_Soref]
19:02:07 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: Is there any reason to continue?
19:02:09 [Josh_Soref]
ack sick
19:02:27 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: Are there objections to
19:02:51 [Josh_Soref]
... saying that we define this for the first two cases anne mentioned
19:03:05 [anne]
I would object to making the decision in a synchronous manner
19:03:11 [Josh_Soref]
... and for the third case, we leave it as "if you're using another protocol, you figure it out"
19:03:17 [Josh_Soref]
anne: i don't want us to make synchronous decisions
19:03:25 [hober]
19:03:34 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: i agree
19:03:41 [Josh_Soref]
... but for the sake of getting out of the room
19:04:08 [Josh_Soref]
... Is there anyone who can not live with Florian's suggestion?
19:04:12 [Josh_Soref]
[ No one ]
19:04:24 [anne]
shepazu, just wanted to clarify as there's more than WebApps in this room
19:04:27 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: is there anyone who can not live with a policy of by default we use Same-Origin
19:04:30 [Josh_Soref]
... for fonts
19:04:34 [anne]
shepazu, no need for tss sounds
19:04:36 [Josh_Soref]
... and you use CORS
19:04:41 [Josh_Soref]
[ No objection ]
19:04:57 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: we're out of time
19:05:07 [Josh_Soref]
... thanks very much
19:05:10 [Josh_Soref]
[ Applause ]
19:05:18 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
19:05:18 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
19:06:12 [jdaggett_]
jdaggett_ has joined #webapps
19:06:13 [Ms2ger]
19:06:29 [glazou]
glazou has joined #webapps
19:06:32 [weinig]
weinig has joined #webapps
19:06:34 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
19:06:34 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
19:06:49 [shepazu]
(anne, I don't feel it's useful to keep bringing up the decision policy when it's well established, and since any decision will *always* be subject to later discussion, in any group in W3C I've been in)
19:07:02 [Ms2ger]
19:07:04 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
19:07:04 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
19:07:24 [plinss]
plinss has joined #webapps
19:07:26 [smfr]
smfr has joined #webapps
19:07:44 [dbaron]
dbaron has left #webapps
19:09:39 [Zakim]
19:09:48 [fjh]
fjh has joined #webapps
19:09:49 [Tom_]
Tom_ has joined #webapps
19:10:15 [dino]
dino has joined #webapps
19:13:36 [spoussa]
spoussa has joined #webapps
19:13:53 [Rossen]
Rossen has joined #webapps
19:14:53 [Bert]
Topic: animations [cont'd]
19:15:05 [Bert]
19:18:33 [smfr]
smfr has left #webapps
19:19:11 [smaug]
Josh_Soref: so is the agenda for tomorrow somewhere?
19:19:24 [smaug]
I'd like to know when MutationObserver will be discussed
19:19:39 [smaug]
if it will be discussed
19:20:14 [Ms2ger]
19:21:17 [mmielke]
mmielke has joined #webapps
19:23:48 [sriramyadavalli]
sriramyadavalli has joined #webapps
19:23:53 [stearns]
stearns has left #webapps
19:30:50 [tantek]
tantek has joined #webapps
19:35:12 [igarashi]
igarashi has joined #webapps
19:41:27 [hayato]
hayato has joined #webapps
19:44:14 [arronei]
arronei has joined #webapps
19:52:14 [plinss]
plinss has left #webapps
19:52:21 [cslye]
cslye has joined #webapps
19:52:56 [heycam]
s/Topic: animations [cont'd]//
19:53:09 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
19:53:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
19:57:12 [jrossi2]
jrossi2 has joined #webapps
19:58:12 [darin]
darin has joined #webapps
19:59:05 [mjs]
mjs has joined #webapps
19:59:26 [smaug]
smaug has joined #webapps
19:59:40 [darin_]
darin_ has joined #webapps
20:00:08 [bhill2]
bhill2 has joined #webapps
20:00:08 [Eliot]
Eliot has joined #webapps
20:00:10 [rniwa]
rniwa has joined #webapps
20:01:37 [Zakim]
20:01:57 [weinig]
weinig has joined #webapps
20:02:02 [hayato]
hayato has joined #webapps
20:02:14 [adrianba]
adrianba has joined #webapps
20:03:12 [jrossi2]
jrossi2 has joined #webapps
20:03:36 [bkihara]
bkihara has joined #webapps
20:03:57 [Ms2ger]
The Return of the Josh
20:04:06 [abarsto]
abarsto has joined #webapps
20:05:21 [skim]
skim has joined #webapps
20:05:26 [bkihara]
bkihara has left #webapps
20:05:58 [taohong]
taohong has joined #webapps
20:06:59 [anne]
anne has joined #webapps
20:07:04 [pererik]
pererik has joined #webapps
20:07:31 [DKA]
DKA has joined #webapps
20:07:36 [ernesto_jimenez]
ernesto_jimenez has joined #webapps
20:07:39 [Ms2ger]
dom, I hear you're needed
20:08:26 [spoussa]
spoussa has joined #webapps
20:08:56 [Marcos]
Marcos has joined #webapps
20:09:16 [krisk]
krisk has joined #webapps
20:10:31 [nvbalaji]
nvbalaji has joined #webapps
20:11:22 [Zakim]
- +1.408.988.aaaa
20:12:08 [wayne_carr]
wayne_carr has joined #webapps
20:12:17 [Zakim]
20:13:01 [morrita]
morrita has joined #webapps
20:13:02 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #webapps
20:13:03 [DKA]
present+ DanielAppelquist
20:13:03 [stpeter]
stpeter has joined #webapps
20:13:11 [dcooney]
dcooney has joined #webapps
20:13:15 [mjs]
present +mjs
20:13:18 [manyoung]
manyoung has joined #webapps
20:13:19 [Ms2ger]
Topic: Charter, re-chartering and scope
20:13:21 [dcooney]
present +dcooney
20:13:27 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:13:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
20:13:34 [Gopal]
Gopal has joined #webapps
20:13:36 [stpeter]
present +stpeter
20:13:40 [dowan]
dowan has joined #webapps
20:13:43 [MikeSmith]
20:13:48 [manyoung]
present +manyoung
20:13:52 [adrianba]
present+ adrianba
20:13:53 [wayne_carr]
20:14:04 [Josh_Soref]
s/present+WayneCarr/present+ WayneCarr
20:14:09 [Suresh]
Suresh has joined #webapps
20:14:15 [Josh_Soref]
s/present +stpeter/present+ stpeter/
20:14:29 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:14:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
20:14:30 [Soonho]
Soonho has joined #webapps
20:14:32 [stpeter]
Josh_Soref: thanks
20:14:35 [darin]
present+ darin
20:14:39 [jeff]
jeff has joined #webapps
20:14:43 [Josh_Soref]
s/Josh_Soref: thanks//
20:14:48 [Soonho]
present+ Soonho_Lee
20:15:02 [jeff]
present+ Jeff
20:15:08 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Charter/Rechartering
20:15:16 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Items
20:15:18 [ifette]
ifette has joined #webapps
20:15:19 [Josh_Soref]
... WebIntents
20:15:29 [ifette]
present+ ifette
20:15:32 [Ms2ger]
s|s/present+WayneCarr/present+ WayneCarr|
20:15:32 [Josh_Soref]
... -- where should it be, DAP/WebApps
20:15:34 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:15:34 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
20:15:46 [darobin]
darobin has joined #webapps
20:15:49 [Linuz]
Linuz has joined #webapps
20:16:12 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: Can we push Widgets to the top of the stack (TAG will start shortly)
20:16:16 [chsiao]
chsiao has joined #webapps
20:17:11 [Josh_Soref]
[ Introductions ]
20:17:15 [Ms2ger]
shepazu: Doug Schepers, Microsoft
20:17:21 [Ms2ger]
... er, W3C
20:17:31 [magnus]
magnus has joined #webapps
20:18:22 [sicking]
sicking has joined #webapps
20:18:31 [JonathanJ]
JonathanJ has joined #webapps
20:18:45 [Kihong_Kwon]
Kihong_Kwon has joined #webapps
20:19:04 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: welcome everyone
20:19:12 [Josh_Soref]
... dan you wanted to say something about widgets?
20:19:20 [chaals]
20:19:20 [MikeSmith]
20:19:22 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #webapps
20:19:24 [bryan]
bryan has joined #webapps
20:19:26 [chaals]
ack zil
20:19:29 [Josh_Soref]
DanA: no... not really
20:19:30 [skim_]
skim_ has joined #webapps
20:19:39 [Josh_Soref]
... there's a meeting on Saturday on Offline Applications
20:19:56 [Josh_Soref]
... which I'm coordinating
20:20:01 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: this morning we did PubStatus
20:20:21 [fjh]
fjh has joined #webapps
20:20:22 [SungOk_You]
SungOk_You has joined #webapps
20:20:44 [Josh_Soref]
... we also have on the agenda a block of time from 5-6pm tonight titled web application packaging v2
20:20:54 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: What i really wanted to do
20:21:05 [Josh_Soref]
... it seems the widget work we charter for and did is done / about to be done
20:21:05 [mav]
mav has joined #webapps
20:21:13 [Josh_Soref]
... as DanA said, there is this workshop coming up
20:21:17 [Josh_Soref]
20:21:21 [Josh_Soref]
... we have widgets
20:21:25 [Josh_Soref]
... appcache
20:21:29 [Josh_Soref]
... installable widgets
20:21:35 [Josh_Soref]
... offline apps
20:21:45 [Josh_Soref]
... If we go to do a version 2, is that something we'd do in this group?
20:21:53 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: preferably not
20:21:59 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: in the early days of this group
20:22:04 [Josh_Soref]
... it was a shotgun approach
20:22:16 [plh]
plh has joined #webapps
20:22:18 [Josh_Soref]
... i think we started focusing on apis
20:22:28 [MikeSmith]
20:22:29 [DKA]
20:22:38 [Josh_Soref]
... we had the experience of only some of the people focusing on widgets work
20:22:40 [chaals]
q- later
20:22:45 [Josh_Soref]
... it doesn't seem like a good fit
20:22:50 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: from mozilla's point
20:23:03 [Josh_Soref]
... i think what's interesting is ... packaging
20:23:08 [MikeSmith]
RRSAgent, make minutes
20:23:08 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate MikeSmith
20:23:12 [Josh_Soref]
... if that's not in the same group, that's ok
20:23:23 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: we're talking about the scope of this group, Web Apps
20:23:34 [Josh_Soref]
... there may be another group working on installable web apps
20:23:44 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: are we talking about moving all of the widgets stuff?
20:23:57 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: we wouldn't move any of the stuff here, since it's all effectively done
20:24:05 [Josh_Soref]
... we could move or keep any future work
20:24:14 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm happy to go wherever the discussion is
20:24:22 [Josh_Soref]
... since we put in 5 years on the spec
20:24:26 [Josh_Soref]
20:24:36 [Josh_Soref]
... from an ipr perspective, i'm happy with where it is
20:24:50 [Josh_Soref]
... but moving it to another group would enable us to see who's interested
20:24:53 [myakura]
myakura has joined #webapps
20:25:01 [Josh_Soref]
... so we don't just have Marcos on a mailing list emailing himself
20:25:03 [Gopal]
Gopal has joined #webapps
20:25:10 [Josh_Soref]
DanA: thanks for the invite
20:25:16 [Josh_Soref]
... one of the things i wanted to say
20:25:30 [Josh_Soref]
... is that one of my hopes for the workshop on Saturday
20:25:42 [Josh_Soref]
... is to clarify things for offline/appcache/widgets
20:25:44 [stkim]
stkim has joined #webapps
20:25:52 [Josh_Soref]
... and for things outside w3
20:25:57 [chaals]
ack dk
20:25:59 [SungOk_You]
SungOk_You has joined #webapps
20:26:00 [Josh_Soref]
... which have prominense
20:26:12 [bryan]
20:26:28 [taohong]
taohong has joined #webapps
20:26:31 [Josh_Soref]
... I don't think what will come out will be widgets2.
20:26:35 [Josh_Soref]
20:26:45 [Josh_Soref]
... people do use things offline and do want to install them offline
20:26:57 [Josh_Soref]
... it comes back to, i hope we have a coherent discussion on Saturday
20:27:05 [Josh_Soref]
... and out of that comes a mandate for doing work in this space
20:27:13 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: sicking asked if this was just packaging
20:27:18 [plh]
plh has joined #webapps
20:27:20 [Josh_Soref]
... my answer is no
20:27:24 [Josh_Soref]
... packaging is important
20:27:36 [Josh_Soref]
... but a key is looking at applications and how they work
20:27:54 [tantek]
tantek has joined #webapps
20:27:54 [Josh_Soref]
... one of the thing for widgets is to let them work in more weblike ways
20:27:58 [jrossi2]
jrossi2 has joined #webapps
20:28:03 [Josh_Soref]
... we want appcache based things to work more like widgets
20:28:13 [Josh_Soref]
... appcache is at its basics packaging
20:28:25 [Josh_Soref]
... like Marcos, we don't really care whether it happens here, or somewhere else
20:28:34 [Josh_Soref]
... there is a question, because we're at w3c
20:29:05 [Josh_Soref]
... because we deal with objections/strong objections relating to chartering
20:29:12 [Josh_Soref]
... if there's some clear thing we should know
20:29:16 [chaals]
ack ch
20:29:22 [Josh_Soref]
bryan: to underscore what DanA said
20:29:26 [Josh_Soref]
... we have similar views
20:29:34 [Josh_Soref]
... we see widgets as a base for web applications
20:29:38 [Josh_Soref]
... we see some challenges
20:29:42 [Ms2ger]
ack bryan
20:29:43 [Josh_Soref]
... for how it works with the web
20:29:57 [Josh_Soref]
... in terms of security model
20:30:06 [Josh_Soref]
... it's broader than packaging
20:30:09 [Josh_Soref]
... than any specific api
20:30:15 [chaals]
q+ doug
20:30:17 [Kai]
Kai has joined #webapps
20:30:19 [chaals]
ack doug
20:30:22 [bryan]
20:30:25 [Josh_Soref]
... it's more about how they fit into the overall web architecture
20:30:33 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: i'd like to limit the scope to Web Apps Charter
20:30:50 [Josh_Soref]
... I'm proposing that the next charter from Web Apps not include Widgets
20:30:51 [jihye]
jihye has joined #webapps
20:31:07 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: when PAG is done, they should move to REC
20:31:22 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: do we delay the chartering of Web Apps until they're done?
20:31:28 [tobie]
tobie has joined #webapps
20:31:41 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: we just adjust the text to say that Widgets is scope limited to the current deliverables being delivered
20:31:43 [DKA]
20:31:58 [Josh_Soref]
DanA: i'd like to wait until after the Workshop
20:32:00 [chaals]
ack dk
20:32:02 [MikeSmith]
20:32:25 [Josh_Soref]
[ ArtB does a time check ]
20:32:41 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Charter/Web Intents
20:32:46 [Josh_Soref]
jgraham: Web Intents
20:32:51 [Josh_Soref]
... is based on Android Intents
20:33:02 [Josh_Soref]
... it allows a site to talk about how they handle actions
20:33:13 [Josh_Soref]
... and allows client sites to ask about an action
20:33:21 [Josh_Soref]
... and lets the user pair them
20:33:27 [Josh_Soref]
... picking the service the user wants to use
20:33:35 [Josh_Soref]
... It's a solution to the "nasgar problem"
20:33:40 [Josh_Soref]
... -- Share with 40 items
20:33:48 [heycam]
20:33:58 [Josh_Soref]
... this is a short term communication ipc
20:34:05 [Josh_Soref]
... it was in the scope of DAPI
20:34:19 [Josh_Soref]
plh: Web Intents is also in the scope of DAP
20:34:40 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: It was deliberately put into the DAP charter
20:34:47 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:34:47 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
20:34:50 [Josh_Soref]
... it wasn't listed as Web Intents
20:35:02 [Josh_Soref]
plh: is that WG working on it?
20:35:13 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: I proposed doing it in DAP because we're already chartered to do it
20:35:19 [Josh_Soref]
plh: what about Joint?
20:35:28 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: I'm always worried about joint deliverables
20:35:35 [Josh_Soref]
MikeSmith: what's the value of Joint?
20:35:42 [Josh_Soref]
... except additional process?
20:36:06 [Josh_Soref]
plh: you get more patent commitments since you have commitments from members of both groups
20:36:11 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: in my experience
20:36:16 [MikeSmith]
tantek, likely nothing about UX, just about whether to take up the technology in the WebApps WG
20:36:19 [myakura_]
myakura_ has joined #webapps
20:36:25 [Josh_Soref]
... I would see the problem of discussions getting split up across 3 mailing lists
20:36:31 [Josh_Soref]
20:36:37 [Josh_Soref]
... unless we add a third mailing list
20:36:44 [Josh_Soref]
dom: getting a sub mailing list is trivial
20:36:51 [Josh_Soref]
... the difficult part is getting people to subscribe to it
20:36:52 [chaals]
20:37:12 [MikeSmith]
20:37:15 [Josh_Soref]
... the other thing is that web intents relates to discovery
20:37:20 [chaals]
q+ james, chaals
20:37:37 [junghoonmoon]
junghoonmoon has joined #webapps
20:37:38 [Josh_Soref]
... and DAP already has that in its charter
20:37:46 [davida]
davida has joined #webapps
20:37:51 [Josh_Soref]
ifette: part of the important consideration
20:38:00 [Josh_Soref]
... it may be in DAP's charter
20:38:10 [Josh_Soref]
... being in a charter may be expedient
20:38:15 [Josh_Soref]
... but it may not be the right solution
20:38:25 [Josh_Soref]
... we've talked about Web Intents as a possible solution for Permissions problems
20:38:35 [Josh_Soref]
... there's a lot of tie in potentially between Web Intents and other work in this WG
20:38:44 [Josh_Soref]
... I think this group already has the relevant members
20:38:57 [Josh_Soref]
... it's nice, I appreciate that DAP did outreach
20:39:02 [tantek]
MikeSmith - without UX being the focus/driver, I'd suggest not bothering with taking up any such technology in any working group.
20:39:03 [chaals]
q+ mark
20:39:10 [chaals]
q- later
20:39:13 [Josh_Soref]
jgraham: relating to device interaction
20:39:19 [Josh_Soref]
... I agree those will happen
20:39:21 [tantek]
without UX being nailed first, intents is pretty much doomed
20:39:24 [Josh_Soref]
... the way that the api is written
20:39:27 [shanec]
shanec has joined #webapps
20:39:28 [stakagi]
stakagi has joined #webapps
20:39:28 [Josh_Soref]
... is so generic
20:39:43 [tantek]
or we can all repeat the lessons learned by OpenID trying to solve the NASCAR problem (where UX was also neglected)
20:39:57 [chaals]
... that it doesn't matter whether it ties to the device or not.
20:40:03 [ifette]
20:40:12 [Josh_Soref]
20:40:28 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:40:28 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
20:40:29 [karl]
karl has joined #webapps
20:40:35 [Josh_Soref]
dom: I think the fact that DAP is pushing quite heavily on service and discovery
20:40:40 [Josh_Soref]
... means that we want to be involved
20:40:48 [vgalindo]
vgalindo has joined #webapps
20:40:49 [Josh_Soref]
MarkV: Mark V.. Comcast
20:40:59 [mav]
20:41:00 [Josh_Soref]
... Part of the reason we're interested
20:41:06 [Josh_Soref]
20:41:12 [jhawkins]
jhawkins has joined #webapps
20:41:18 [Josh_Soref]
... Comcast and Cable Labs
20:41:26 [Josh_Soref]
... and Webinos have proposals
20:41:32 [Josh_Soref]
... It's in the charter of DAP currently
20:41:38 [Josh_Soref]
... it may be more appropriate here
20:41:42 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: +1
20:41:44 [Josh_Soref]
... literally
20:41:50 [MoZ]
MoZ has joined #webapps
20:41:51 [Josh_Soref]
... we have a proposal for discovery
20:41:55 [Josh_Soref]
... I'm speaking for Opera
20:42:05 [Josh_Soref]
... a lot of the people who need to be in the discussion are in DAP
20:42:13 [Josh_Soref]
... a joint deliverable has a little bit of value
20:42:18 [Josh_Soref]
... a wider IPR commitment
20:42:25 [Josh_Soref]
... more pain from split discussion
20:42:26 [tantek]
How about a CG instead?
20:42:34 [Josh_Soref]
... more lists is hell
20:42:44 [Josh_Soref]
... there's a proposal of merging DAP and Web Apps
20:42:54 [Josh_Soref]
... it's part of our position
20:43:05 [Josh_Soref]
[ amusing proposal and laughter ]
20:43:12 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: We would lean towards
20:43:26 [mjs]
20:43:28 [Josh_Soref]
... DAP *was* a pretty dysfunctional, pointless, stupid thing, 2 years ago
20:43:31 [Josh_Soref]
... it is no longer
20:43:32 [chaals]
ack ch
20:43:35 [jdaggett_]
jdaggett_ has joined #webapps
20:43:36 [chaals]
ack ma
20:43:39 [chaals]
ack ja
20:43:47 [chaals]
ack mj
20:43:51 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: Web Intents and Discovery are similar, but they are not the same
20:43:56 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: As a point of information
20:43:59 [sriramyadavalli]
sriramyadavalli has joined #webapps
20:44:04 [Josh_Soref]
... Apple is unlikely to ever join DAP
20:44:11 [tlr]
tlr has joined #webapps
20:44:16 [Josh_Soref]
... because of IPR concerns and others
20:44:27 [Josh_Soref]
... we are somewhat interested in Web Intents
20:44:37 [Josh_Soref]
... and would try to comment if it were in Web Apps or joint in Web Apps
20:44:39 [arronei]
arronei has joined #webapps
20:44:47 [Josh_Soref]
... we would not if it were solely in DAP
20:44:55 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: I'm hearing concrete reasons to have it in both
20:45:01 [Josh_Soref]
... that sort of supports having it as Joint
20:45:10 [Josh_Soref]
darin: Darin, Google
20:45:18 [Josh_Soref]
... we work together with Apple
20:45:30 [Josh_Soref]
... it's fairly important that we be in the group with Apple talking about Web Intents
20:45:35 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: two things
20:45:37 [Josh_Soref]
... permissions
20:45:48 [Josh_Soref]
... permissions as we all know is a flaming ungodly mess
20:46:01 [Josh_Soref]
... it comes up in web apps
20:46:13 [Josh_Soref]
... it comes up with almost everything that DAP does
20:46:25 [Josh_Soref]
... DAP will fail in everything if it isn't solved
20:46:35 [Josh_Soref]
... If Google and Apple are working together with everything
20:46:39 [Josh_Soref]
... why does it matter?
20:46:51 [Josh_Soref]
... Apple can have Google present the point
20:47:06 [Josh_Soref]
darin: it's much easier if things are only in one room
20:47:15 [Josh_Soref]
... we are developing Web Intents with Mozilla
20:47:24 [Josh_Soref]
... it would be nice if everyone was in one room
20:47:40 [Josh_Soref]
... trying to maintain the conversation in different WGs is probably similar
20:47:46 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: both groups do all their work in the public
20:48:00 [Josh_Soref]
... web apps is a public mailing list the everyone can subscribe to
20:48:20 [Josh_Soref]
ifette: the same argument could be made for whatwg
20:48:50 [Josh_Soref]
[ shepazu and darin share the mic to talk about mailing lists / where work is ]
20:48:59 [Josh_Soref]
dom: what darin is saying is that if the work was only in DAP
20:49:02 [sangwhan]
sangwhan has joined #webapps
20:49:11 [Josh_Soref]
... then since apple couldn't be in DAP
20:49:22 [Josh_Soref]
... that it would require someone to do work to share with apple
20:49:37 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: any outcome where all the parties can't be at the table is a failure
20:49:42 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:49:42 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
20:49:43 [Josh_Soref]
[ ArtB time check ]
20:49:57 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Would anyone object to a joint deliverable?
20:50:05 [Josh_Soref]
ifette: capital O object?
20:50:20 [Josh_Soref]
... I think it would be better if it was a single list, a single WG
20:50:31 [Josh_Soref]
... I don't think we'd Object, but we have a preference against
20:50:48 [Josh_Soref]
... If DAP folks don't object to doing work in web apps, why don't we do the work here?
20:51:02 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: to clarify, you don't want it to be a joint deliverable?
20:51:12 [Josh_Soref]
darin: DAP folks don't mind to do work in web apps
20:51:17 [Josh_Soref]
... so why not do work in web apps?
20:51:33 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: just as ifette won't formally object to a Joint deliverable
20:51:39 [Josh_Soref]
... we would rather that the work happen in DAP
20:51:45 [Josh_Soref]
... it's not DAP saying we should merge the group
20:51:51 [Josh_Soref]
... it was darobin tossing up the idea
20:52:01 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: i'm not even sure myself it's a good idea
20:52:15 [Josh_Soref]
dom: one way is to go back to DAP
20:52:30 [Josh_Soref]
... maybe there are people in DAP who would want to be involved but can't join Web Apps
20:52:37 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: I'd like to move on to the next topic
20:53:05 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: I've made a proposal
20:53:11 [Josh_Soref]
... that we upload the docs
20:53:15 [Josh_Soref]
... and get a thread started
20:53:22 [Josh_Soref]
... it sounds like it's not going to be in dap specifically
20:53:25 [Josh_Soref]
... it could be a joint effort
20:53:31 [Josh_Soref]
... it could move to a third mailing list
20:53:34 [Josh_Soref]
... after the fact
20:53:39 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: as a way of moving forward
20:53:41 [MikeSmith]
RRSAgent, make minutes
20:53:41 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate MikeSmith
20:53:45 [Josh_Soref]
... Web Apps is not chartered to do that
20:53:53 [Josh_Soref]
... if DAP does the work and uses Web Apps
20:54:04 [Josh_Soref]
ifette: No. no
20:54:13 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: you want to wait until chartering?
20:54:34 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: do people object to adding Web Intents to the Web Apps charter?
20:54:44 [Josh_Soref]
... we can always decide on Joint later
20:54:51 [Josh_Soref]
... I ask the chairs to make that call
20:55:07 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Does anyone object to adding Web Intents to the Web Apps charter?
20:55:19 [Josh_Soref]
Suresh: Suresh, RIM
20:55:19 [Suresh]
20:55:27 [Josh_Soref]
Suresh: so, trying to understand...
20:55:34 [Josh_Soref]
... what are the implications on the DAP charter?
20:55:47 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: we're just talking in this WG about this charter
20:56:08 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: in terms of initial discussions before chartering discussions are made
20:56:13 [glazou]
glazou has joined #webapps
20:56:21 [Josh_Soref]
... we've discussed things before the decision was made
20:56:24 [a12u]
a12u has joined #webapps
20:56:25 [Josh_Soref]
... as we did for Editing
20:56:37 [Josh_Soref]
[ Time check, 5 mins to 2pm ]
20:56:50 [Josh_Soref]
weinig: How would it be added?
20:57:02 [glazou]
glazou has left #webapps
20:57:06 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: how it would be added would be a deliverable, discussed on the list
20:57:21 [Josh_Soref]
mav: if that's concluded, i would ask that the same thing happen for discovery api
20:57:29 [Josh_Soref]
... because there's a lot of overlap
20:57:34 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: +1
20:57:49 [Josh_Soref]
... we would be upset if one happens in DAP and one happens in Web Apps
20:58:00 [Josh_Soref]
... we would likely to formally object
20:58:05 [Josh_Soref]
20:58:27 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: No objection to adding Web Intents to the Web Apps Charter
20:58:38 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:58:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
20:58:39 [MikeSmith]
RRSAgent, make minutes
20:58:39 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate MikeSmith
20:58:52 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Charter/Merge DAP into Web Apps
20:59:05 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: the general process of W3C
20:59:11 [Josh_Soref]
... is that we put things in DAP
20:59:18 [fjh_]
fjh_ has joined #webapps
20:59:19 [Josh_Soref]
... people say it sucks
20:59:27 [Josh_Soref]
... two years later, we try to move them to Web Apps
20:59:35 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm not sure it's a good idea
20:59:44 [Josh_Soref]
... but i just wanted to throw the idea out there
20:59:47 [Josh_Soref]
[ Beep ]
20:59:52 [fjh_]
fjh_ has joined #webapps
21:00:02 [Josh_Soref]
ifette: There's not enmity with DAP
21:00:15 [Josh_Soref]
... for the things that we work on, we want to make sure we have all the browser vendors there
21:00:19 [a12u]
a12u has joined #webapps
21:00:21 [Josh_Soref]
... I know Microsoft joined, and that's great
21:00:28 [Josh_Soref]
... but we heard Apple won't
21:00:37 [Josh_Soref]
... For us, we need all the browsers to give input
21:00:42 [Josh_Soref]
... if we don't get that, there's not much point
21:01:02 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Would any of the Web Apps members object to us merging DAP into Web Apps?
21:01:04 [cyril]
cyril has joined #webapps
21:01:12 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: Personal objections?
21:01:26 [jcdufourd]
jcdufourd has joined #webapps
21:01:31 [Josh_Soref]
Personal objections - 9
21:01:44 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: are any of those Formal Objections?
21:02:03 [uohuoh]
uohuoh has joined #webapps
21:02:08 [noriya]
noriya has joined #webapps
21:02:21 [Josh_Soref]
[ There were two Objections likely ]
21:02:21 [uohuoh]
uohuoh has left #webapps
21:02:28 [spoussa]
present+ spoussa
21:02:35 [DKA]
DKA has joined #webapps
21:02:58 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Charter/Web Notifications
21:03:12 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: what anne wanted to discuss was taking the deliverables from Web Notifications
21:03:23 [Josh_Soref]
... and closing Web Notifications
21:03:27 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: I'd like to here why
21:03:38 [Josh_Soref]
anne: the rationale would be that it's very hard to move it forward within the scope of Web Notifications
21:03:43 [Josh_Soref]
... the editor is overworked
21:03:52 [Josh_Soref]
... it's a very small group, I think 6 people
21:03:59 [Josh_Soref]
... not enough to pay attention
21:04:14 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: I should have noted that before the Web Notification WG was formed
21:04:35 [Josh_Soref]
... some members opposed in Member Confidential way to it being added to the Web Apps WG
21:04:49 [Josh_Soref]
... I remind people that they were Member Confidential
21:05:05 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: speaking as staff contact, I don't think it's that easy to find editors here
21:05:13 [Josh_Soref]
anne: I could use chair time
21:05:24 [euhrhane]
euhrhane has joined #webapps
21:05:39 [arronei]
arronei has left #webapps
21:05:42 [mmielke]
mmielke has joined #webapps
21:05:47 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: can we take a poll of who would implement the spec?
21:05:57 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: who is actually interested in implementing this spec?
21:06:00 [chsiao]
chsiao has joined #webapps
21:06:04 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Google, Apple, Opera, Mozilla
21:06:56 [Josh_Soref]
adrianba: I didn't commit, because often we don't talk about things we're going to do, until we do them
21:07:07 [Josh_Soref]
... and when we do say we're interesting, that isn't a binding commitment either
21:07:20 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: i'd like to repeat that we tried before, and i don't think it will work
21:07:23 [Josh_Soref]
... this time
21:07:30 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: Opera would be happy with it being here
21:07:34 [richt]
richt has joined #webapps
21:07:34 [Josh_Soref]
... but we expect it to fail again
21:08:11 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: The chairs tend to think that if we made the proposal to add it to the charter
21:08:22 [Josh_Soref]
... that it would fail due to a formal objection
21:08:47 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: we will put up the proposal to merging Web Notifications subject to Web Notifications being amenable
21:08:55 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Charter/DOM Mutations
21:09:26 [anne]
euh used to be called "Mutation Events"
21:09:32 [MikeSmith]
21:09:33 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: from the perspective of the current charter
21:09:42 [Josh_Soref]
... There was a deliverable of "ADMN"
21:09:59 [Josh_Soref]
... there was a thread from adam klein
21:10:16 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: from the charter perspective, how do we move forward
21:10:24 [Josh_Soref]
... is this a new specification, or do we add to dom4?
21:10:39 [Josh_Soref]
anne: do we have to specify where it goes in the charter?
21:10:45 [Josh_Soref]
... as long as we say we're going to do it
21:10:59 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: I don't think that's a requirement
21:11:15 [Josh_Soref]
... we just need to clarify that we will do that work
21:11:21 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: do we need a specific name in the charter?
21:11:28 [dino]
dino has joined #webapps
21:11:39 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: we need "managing changes to the dom and how they happen"
21:12:00 [heycam]
21:12:06 [dom]
s/the dom/the DOM/
21:12:14 [MikeSmith]
21:12:14 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: add "monitoring changes to the DOM and how they happen" to the charter"
21:12:20 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Charter/XHR
21:12:25 [rniwa]
MikeSmith: thanks
21:12:31 [Josh_Soref]
anne: basically everyone is focusing on XHR2
21:12:42 [Josh_Soref]
... I don't think that it makes sense to maintain version 1
21:12:52 [Josh_Soref]
... the effort far exceeds any imaginable benefit
21:13:00 [Josh_Soref]
... no one is focused on getting it finished
21:13:10 [Josh_Soref]
adrianba: I agree with anne on this specific case
21:13:16 [Josh_Soref]
... I'd like to avoid setting a precedent
21:13:32 [Josh_Soref]
... but for this case, I think it makes sense to stop working on level 1
21:13:39 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: I don't have a specific preference
21:13:45 [Josh_Soref]
... but I would kind of like to see it shipped
21:13:49 [Josh_Soref]
... if we could do that in a short order
21:14:00 [Josh_Soref]
anne: Last summer, summer of 2010
21:14:06 [Josh_Soref]
... I wrote the spec, I wrote the test suite
21:14:14 [Josh_Soref]
... and no one followed up, none of the implementers
21:14:23 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: like adrianba, I think it's a bad precedent
21:14:33 [Josh_Soref]
... to not ship specifications, that are already implemented and done
21:14:52 [Josh_Soref]
... anne works on a lot of things, Opera would much rather he work on XHR2, than level 1
21:14:58 [Josh_Soref]
... as chair,
21:15:19 [Josh_Soref]
... does someone feel like we all do, and feel like finishing it?
21:15:30 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: why don't we just drop the '2' from XHR spec?
21:16:24 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: there is an XHR1, it's probably pretty much done
21:16:33 [Josh_Soref]
... I don't see much point in playing a numbers game
21:16:42 [Tom_]
Tom_ has joined #webapps
21:16:48 [Josh_Soref]
[ What prevents us from it being done? ]
21:17:01 [Josh_Soref]
anne: lack of implementers trying to pass the test suite
21:17:19 [Josh_Soref]
anne: it is not done, it just requires maintenance costs
21:17:29 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: why is XHR2 dependent on XHR1
21:17:36 [Josh_Soref]
anne: XHR2 isn't dependent on XHR1
21:17:42 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: so kill it!
21:17:58 [dom]
but are there other specs depending on XHR1?
21:18:05 [dom]
we should probably check before taking such a decision
21:18:23 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: is the test suite complete?
21:18:29 [Josh_Soref]
anne: the test suite is pretty much complete
21:18:35 [jrossi2]
jrossi2 has joined #webapps
21:18:37 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: why aren't people passing the tests?
21:18:46 [Josh_Soref]
adrianba: i think there are people that are passing all the tests
21:19:04 [Josh_Soref]
... i think the changes that are required to pass the tests are probably not high priorities to the vendors
21:19:10 [Josh_Soref]
... since the web kind of works
21:19:22 [Josh_Soref]
q+ to ask if adrianba meant "pass" or "run"
21:19:59 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: if we can't get two implementations to pass the test
21:20:07 [Josh_Soref]
... then we remove that requirement from the charter
21:20:25 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: does anyone object such that they're willing to do the work
21:20:37 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: i'm willing to review the work necessary
21:20:52 [Josh_Soref]
anne: i'd object to a watered down version of the spec
21:21:11 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: i would object to having a spec with duplicate text
21:21:22 [Josh_Soref]
... on the grounds of having confusion
21:21:30 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: that's the situation we're in now
21:21:34 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: that's a process problem
21:21:39 [darin]
is this the test suite: ?
21:21:48 [anne]
My main point is that a specification should be complete and not leave out all kinds of requirements
21:21:58 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: we have a deliverable
21:22:06 [Josh_Soref]
... that is of risk of being taken further
21:22:07 [anne]
darin, yeah, one of the copies
21:22:16 [Josh_Soref]
... and having objections raised later
21:22:21 [anne]
not sure if my harness works a 100%, been a while
21:22:22 [darin]
anne, ok... looks like chrome and firefox fail a lot of tests
21:22:33 [anne]
yeah, mostly edge cases
21:22:41 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: it seems clear that we don't have anyone who is going to finish the spec
21:22:51 [Josh_Soref]
... with the possible exception of shepazu
21:22:54 [fjh]
rrsagent, generate minutes
21:22:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate fjh
21:23:06 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: so are we happy to make the spec...
21:23:37 [Josh_Soref]
ifette: "if the spec got finished, would all the browsers care, and go back, and become fully compliant? if not, then it doesn't seem worth doing"
21:23:45 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: it's at the point where all that needs to happen is implementation
21:24:02 [Josh_Soref]
dom: to implement XHR2, XHR1 needs to be done
21:24:20 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: I don't have a strong opinion about carrying forward
21:24:28 [Josh_Soref]
... but i'd rather a strong opinion to not have it in limbo
21:24:33 [Josh_Soref]
adrianba: I agree with mjs
21:24:39 [Josh_Soref]
... the value of completing an XHR1
21:24:49 [Josh_Soref]
... that describes currently implementations with whatever vagueness is necessary
21:25:01 [Josh_Soref]
... getting that to REC is when the IPR obligations kick in
21:25:07 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: that's important
21:25:15 [Josh_Soref]
... how many organizations in this room make browsers?
21:25:19 [Josh_Soref]
... because it's more than 5
21:25:30 [Ms2ger]
[ Amaya ]
21:25:32 [Josh_Soref]
... Nokia makes, RIM, W3C (Amaya)
21:25:40 [Josh_Soref]
s/makes/makes one/
21:25:54 [Josh_Soref]
... there is some value to other future vendors
21:25:57 [Josh_Soref]
... there is some value
21:26:16 [Josh_Soref]
... if we include XHR1 as a deliverable, not that it does not have an active editor, and may be abandoned
21:26:20 [sangwhan]
sangwhan has joined #webapps
21:26:23 [Josh_Soref]
... does anyone object?
21:26:31 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: I'd object to keeping it in limbo
21:26:38 [Josh_Soref]
anne: I'd end up maintaining it
21:26:47 [DKA]
DKA has joined #webapps
21:26:49 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: If i don't do it in 6 months, I won't do it
21:27:00 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: does anyone object to just dropping it?
21:27:17 [Josh_Soref]
bryan: does that mean XHR2 will never be finished?
21:27:39 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: no, it means the things that need to be done in XHR1 won't be done until we finish the XHR2 spec
21:28:00 [Josh_Soref]
PaulK: how much of XHR1 is just a subset of XHR2?
21:28:02 [Josh_Soref]
[ Everything ]
21:28:04 [tcelik]
tcelik has joined #webapps
21:28:12 [Josh_Soref]
... I don't understand this talk
21:28:22 [Josh_Soref]
... the problem is you don't have implementations or people willing to do testing
21:28:31 [tantek]
tantek has joined #webapps
21:28:32 [Josh_Soref]
anne: comments still come in
21:28:41 [Josh_Soref]
.. for instance defining Garbage Collection
21:28:45 [Josh_Soref]
21:28:46 [Tom]
Tom has joined #webapps
21:29:05 [Josh_Soref]
... but since XHR1 and XHR2 define events [or similar?] differently
21:29:10 [Josh_Soref]
... then editing it isn't that simple
21:29:24 [Josh_Soref]
... just because there's a CR version listed on the W3C page
21:29:32 [Josh_Soref]
... doesn't mean it's the latest version
21:29:39 [Josh_Soref]
... the latest version is the editor's draft
21:29:49 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: for almost XHR's history, there have been two versions
21:29:56 [Josh_Soref]
... one to spec the original behavior
21:30:02 [Josh_Soref]
... and one to define the new cool features
21:30:04 [tcelik]
tcelik has joined #webapps
21:30:11 [Josh_Soref]
... everyone interested was interested in the latter
21:30:17 [youenn]
youenn has joined #webapps
21:30:19 [Josh_Soref]
... in retrospect, maybe this was a mistake
21:30:33 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: mjs maintains his objection, shepazu withdrew his
21:30:51 [Josh_Soref]
dom: one thing to check, is to see if anyone has a normative dependency on XHR1
21:31:00 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: issues like that I expect to come out during chartering
21:31:12 [Josh_Soref]
dom: chartering is a messy process
21:31:20 [dom]
21:31:38 [Josh_Soref]
ACTION chaals to make sure that the webapps process is taking to the attention of the Chairs
21:31:39 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-629 - Make sure that the webapps process is taking to the attention of the Chairs [on Charles McCathieNevile - due 2011-11-07].
21:31:53 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: Drop XHR1 from our deliverables
21:32:26 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Charter/Parsing and Serialization
21:32:33 [Ms2ger]
21:33:01 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: is there any objection to adding this to our charter?
21:33:02 [Ms2ger]
Sorry, my connection is spotty
21:33:46 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: does anyone object? does anyone propose that we add the work?
21:34:11 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: does Ms2ger plan to do the work?
21:34:22 [Ms2ger]
It doesn't matter to me, but I don't plan to put a lot of time in W3C-specific stuff
21:34:37 [ifette_]
ifette_ has joined #webapps
21:34:57 [davida]
davida has joined #webapps
21:35:07 [Ms2ger]
The spec is in the public domain, if someone wants to push it at the W3C, that's fine with me
21:35:44 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: is it our policy that we only add specs that we have editors for?
21:35:53 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: we don't have that policy
21:35:57 [Ms2ger]
I plan to keep doing the technical editing, but it's rather low-priority for me
21:35:58 [Josh_Soref]
... we tend to try to have an editor
21:36:22 [tantek]
Ms2ger - what do you think of placing the spec in a Community Group?
21:36:23 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: we have some new stuff, web intents
21:36:38 [Josh_Soref]
... preferably we'd have at least two vendors interested in implementing it
21:36:47 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: i don't think we'll have a shortage of implementations
21:36:54 [Josh_Soref]
... of course that was the case with XHR1
21:36:55 [Ms2ger]
tantek, don't feel like spending time on that
21:37:04 [weinig]
/msg anne
21:37:06 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: and look at how useful that was
21:37:14 [Josh_Soref]
s|/msg anne||
21:37:16 [tantek]
Ms2ger - I sympathize.
21:37:36 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: i don't object adding it
21:37:43 [Tom]
Tom has joined #webapps
21:37:46 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: my preference is not to add stuff without an editor
21:38:03 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: i think this specification would be of particular interest to the SVG WG
21:38:18 [Josh_Soref]
... as someone from the SVG WG, i'd like to see this in the group that works on DOM
21:38:24 [Rossen]
Rossen has joined #webapps
21:38:27 [Josh_Soref]
ACTION shepazu to ask the SVG WG for editors
21:38:27 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-630 - Ask the SVG WG for editors [on Doug Schepers - due 2011-11-07].
21:38:44 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: Add Parsing and Serialization to Charter
21:38:49 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Charter/Editing
21:38:58 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: I know Aryeh was working on Editing
21:39:04 [Josh_Soref]
... but he didn't make a commitment
21:39:15 [Josh_Soref]
... do we let him continue working in the CG
21:39:24 [Josh_Soref]
... do we pick it up now, pick it up later?
21:39:54 [Josh_Soref]
ryosuke: i'd like to see it in the charter
21:40:12 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: aryeh felt that having it in a CG to do work forward
21:40:28 [Josh_Soref]
... but he didn't object to this WG finalizing it
21:40:38 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: in the absence of someone driving it in Web Apps
21:40:43 [Josh_Soref]
... I think it would be a bad idea
21:40:48 [Josh_Soref]
... especially without the resources
21:41:11 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: How is this any different from the previous charter item?
21:41:18 [smaug]
#whatwg: AryehGregor"Microsoft Corp. has joined the HTML Editing APIs Community Group"
21:42:01 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: I am proposing that we reject Editing APIs under similar circumstances
21:42:05 [Josh_Soref]
... given that there is a CG
21:42:26 [Josh_Soref]
... I feel we should let them alone given they already have a CG and we aren't likely to add much
21:42:43 [Josh_Soref]
ryosuke: there's a difference in complexity
21:42:58 [Josh_Soref]
... Editing is much more complicated
21:43:13 [Josh_Soref]
... I think it will take a couple of years before it's ready
21:43:31 [Josh_Soref]
adrianba: Microsoft just joined the CG with the intent of helping it there
21:43:48 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: does anyone propose that we move editing into the WG?
21:43:58 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: We will not move Editing into this WG
21:44:10 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: MikeSmith asked me to add IME
21:44:18 [Josh_Soref]
... and I had a generic item related to work mode
21:45:26 [Josh_Soref]
MikeSmith: I was hoping ifette was going to be here
21:45:30 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Charter/IME
21:45:52 [Josh_Soref]
MikeSmith: if you type on a computer in Japanese/Chinese, and to some extent Koreans
21:45:56 [Josh_Soref]
21:46:20 [Josh_Soref]
... You type in Latin, and then you press a (compose) key to convert the text into a final character
21:46:35 [Josh_Soref]
... There are times when you're using a web application that you want the web application to be aware that you're using an IME
21:46:46 [jrossi2]
21:46:48 [Josh_Soref]
... The use case is when you want to do completion
21:46:54 [Josh_Soref]
q- Suresh
21:46:57 [Josh_Soref]
q- Josh_Soref
21:47:15 [Josh_Soref]
... The IME is a platform level application running alongside the browser
21:47:24 [Josh_Soref]
... The browser would need to have access to the system IME
21:47:29 [Josh_Soref]
... and expose it to web applications
21:47:37 [Josh_Soref]
... web applications do not have access today to the system IME
21:47:41 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
21:47:41 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ms2ger
21:47:58 [jrossi2]
q- jrossi
21:47:59 [Josh_Soref]
q+ Josh_Soref to note that IMEs are incredibly buggy, crash prone and such exposure is a security hazard
21:48:12 [Josh_Soref]
MikeSmith: it's very hard to explain this to people unfamiliar with IMEs
21:48:34 [Josh_Soref]
... a video showing this demoing web suggested autocomplete
21:48:42 [Josh_Soref]
... it's pretty simple, but it isn't self explanatory
21:48:46 [ArtB]
… IME spec:
21:49:00 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: given two google editors
21:49:07 [Josh_Soref]
... is google proposing that it go into web apps?
21:49:16 [Josh_Soref]
ryosuke: yes, we'd like it to be in this WG
21:49:42 [Josh_Soref]
... if you're using Google Docs, then a web browser doesn't know that you're editing
21:49:46 [Josh_Soref]
... and thus can't enable IME
21:49:57 [MikeSmith]
21:50:00 [mjs]
21:50:04 [dom]
ack Josh_Soref
21:50:04 [Zakim]
Josh_Soref, you wanted to note that IMEs are incredibly buggy, crash prone and such exposure is a security hazard
21:50:14 [Josh_Soref]
... Google would like to simplify this so that IME can be turned on and off
21:50:35 [dom]
Josh_Soref: IME are incredibly buggy, crash prone, and such exposure is a security hazard
21:50:37 [heycam]
Josh_Soref: I'd like to note that I've worked on Mozilla for >10 yrs, one thing I looked at was crashes
21:50:42 [heycam]
... got lots from X11 IME
21:50:54 [heycam]
... more recently I worked at Nokia on Maemo, we had an IME, not shipped, but we had it
21:50:58 [heycam]
... it also wasn't particualrly wonderful
21:51:04 [MikeSmith]
21:51:10 [heycam]
... more recently we had some great crashes frmo a web based IME in windows, from mozilla
21:51:18 [heycam]
... the IME is actually cloud based
21:51:28 [heycam]
... when their cloud went down, everyone using that IME started crashing
21:51:38 [heycam]
... any time we expose system level things to the web, it hasn't had experience with bad inputs
21:51:44 [heycam]
... nobody thinks you'll get bad input, and that'sb ad
21:51:49 [MikeSmith]
q+ to say that the IMEs are already exposed -- as Niwa-san noted
21:51:49 [heycam]
s/sb ad/s bad/
21:52:12 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: one thing i'd like to see more clearly explained
21:52:17 [Josh_Soref]
... is the specific use cases for this api
21:52:24 [MikeSmith]
q+ Niwa-san
21:52:27 [Josh_Soref]
... I don't have the experience that Josh_Soref does
21:52:34 [MikeSmith]
q- later
21:52:39 [Josh_Soref]
... but i don't know there's much need
21:52:43 [Josh_Soref]
... it sounds like there's a work around
21:52:53 [Josh_Soref]
... the main downside is that it's inconvenient, or a hack
21:53:08 [mjs]
ack mjs
21:53:10 [Josh_Soref]
... that doesn't seem like a big deal
21:53:21 [Josh_Soref]
ifette: i think there's a lot of reasons for adding the IME api
21:53:25 [Josh_Soref]
... if you look at google instant
21:53:26 [MikeSmith]
ack Niwa-san
21:53:28 [MikeSmith]
21:53:30 [Josh_Soref]
... having access to the list
21:53:36 [Josh_Soref]
q+ Josh_Soref to talk about passwords in Mameo5
21:53:48 [Josh_Soref]
... having access to state makes it better
21:53:55 [Josh_Soref]
... gives a chance to give better results
21:53:57 [Josh_Soref]
... better services
21:54:07 [manyoung]
manyoung has joined #webapps
21:54:13 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: I think it would be good if someone could give a list of use cases where someone could do things you couldn't do today
21:54:26 [Josh_Soref]
... from skimming the document, i couldn't figure out what you could do
21:54:30 [Josh_Soref]
... that you couldn't do otherwise
21:54:38 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: is that an objection?
21:54:45 [Josh_Soref]
... an objection until you get further information?
21:54:54 [jeff]
jeff has joined #webapps
21:54:58 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: i think it would be better for the WG to have more information
21:55:19 [Josh_Soref]
ryosuke: could we add the item to the charter
21:55:36 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: we could add the item, we could talk about it before or after, we could add it next time
21:55:47 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: can someone take an ACTION to address mjs
21:56:02 [Josh_Soref]
ifette: we can certainly come up with that list of use cases
21:56:19 [a12u]
a12u has joined #webapps
21:56:27 [Josh_Soref]
ifette: I can make sure we to get someone from our organization to provide this use case
21:56:33 [Tom]
Tom has joined #webapps
21:56:40 [Josh_Soref]
... If we're going to kill editing, we're going to need to get access
21:56:46 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: we're not going to kill editing
21:56:54 [Josh_Soref]
ack me
21:56:54 [Zakim]
Josh_Soref, you wanted to talk about passwords in Mameo5
21:56:58 [MikeSmith]
21:57:12 [heycam]
Josh_Soref: the other thing is that for Maemo 5 there was a time when the input method would warn everything you type into the xterm
21:57:17 [heycam]
... including when you typed ssh passwords
21:57:24 [heycam]
... whatever random letters you type into the browser
21:57:34 [heycam]
... the solution was that IMEs were turned off entirely
21:58:05 [heycam]
... having access as a web page to things that I might type, e.g. if I'm on a form, all the completion things in the forsm -- I think Opera did a good job with the wand -- otherwise all your form information and CC numebrs would automatically be filled in
21:58:20 [Josh_Soref]
ifette: we all agree there are potential security considerations to take into account
21:58:25 [Josh_Soref]
21:58:35 [Josh_Soref]
... we have a team from the tokyo office
21:58:49 [Josh_Soref]
... it's important for affected usrers
21:58:57 [MikeSmith]
21:58:58 [Josh_Soref]
21:59:08 [Will]
Will has joined #webapps
21:59:11 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: this isn't a place for technical feedback
21:59:15 [darobin]
+1 to having IME
21:59:18 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: that's fine
21:59:22 [Josh_Soref]
21:59:40 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: is there an objection to adding this to the charter?
21:59:58 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: before we were talking about seeing use cases before the charter
22:00:07 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: you could cut it out during chartering
22:00:17 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: i'd like to see use cases before committing to it
22:00:24 [Josh_Soref]
... if the use cases are editing and canvas
22:00:34 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: i think the charter is good until spring
22:00:42 [Josh_Soref]
... historically it takes a long time to get our charter added
22:00:46 [Josh_Soref]
22:00:52 [Josh_Soref]
... there's a 4 week AC review
22:01:03 [Josh_Soref]
... we need several weeks for WG discussion
22:01:11 [Josh_Soref]
... the earliest to the AC would be Jan or Feb
22:01:20 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: is there any objection to not putting this in the charter now
22:01:23 [James]
James has joined #webapps
22:01:29 [DKA]
DKA has joined #webapps
22:01:32 [Josh_Soref]
... given we would put it before the WG before the end of the year
22:01:36 [Ruinan]
Ruinan has joined #webapps
22:01:39 [dom]
shepazu, adding a link to from would be useful
22:01:45 [Josh_Soref]
... with an action on chairs to put it before the group
22:01:48 [Josh_Soref]
... ?
22:01:56 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: i'd rather it be in the Charter proposal
22:02:01 [Josh_Soref]
... given that it could be cut later
22:02:03 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: i'd object
22:02:31 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: i'd like to be informed enough about this
22:02:40 [Josh_Soref]
... it seems like that wouldn't take a lot of time
22:03:02 [Josh_Soref]
adrianba: I agree with mjs
22:03:11 [Josh_Soref]
ifette: there's so much time to object
22:03:19 [Josh_Soref]
... if you look over the use cases
22:03:26 [Josh_Soref]
... there's plenty of time to object
22:03:35 [Josh_Soref]
... I could list use cases
22:03:53 [Josh_Soref]
... there is a large class of users who are not well served by a number of sites
22:04:05 [Josh_Soref]
... everyone who is objecting
22:04:33 [a12u]
a12u has joined #webapps
22:04:35 [Josh_Soref]
... yes, we could have done a better job of preparing our case
22:04:45 [Josh_Soref]
... but the objectors aren't affected
22:05:00 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: i believe people should be required to present their case
22:05:00 [sangwhan_]
sangwhan_ has joined #webapps
22:05:12 [Gopal]
Gopal has joined #webapps
22:05:45 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: like mjs, i object the implications
22:05:48 [weinig]
22:05:55 [Josh_Soref]
22:05:57 [Josh_Soref]
22:06:12 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: if you're willing to do the legwork
22:06:18 [Josh_Soref]
... it seems like we have 2 1/2 objections
22:06:25 [Josh_Soref]
... so it seems like you should do the legwork
22:06:50 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: the concrete path forward is that we expect you to further motivate this proposal
22:06:56 [Josh_Soref]
... if you're prepared to put in the legwork
22:07:02 [Josh_Soref]
... around mid december
22:07:13 [Josh_Soref]
... so you give us material
22:07:19 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: i'll take an action for Dec 1
22:07:19 [stakagi]
stakagi has joined #webapps
22:07:24 [Josh_Soref]
[ No Objections ]
22:07:35 [sangwhan]
sangwhan has joined #webapps
22:07:45 [Josh_Soref]
ACTION ifette to talk to people at google to get more support for the proposal
22:07:45 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-631 - Talk to people at google to get more support for the proposal [on Ian Fette - due 2011-11-07].
22:07:57 [smaug]
smaug has joined #webapps
22:08:00 [Josh_Soref]
ACTION chaals to put IME in Charter on the discussion for Dec 1
22:08:01 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-632 - Put IME in Charter on the discussion for Dec 1 [on Charles McCathieNevile - due 2011-11-07].
22:08:21 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, make minutes
22:08:21 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ArtB
22:08:25 [Zakim]
22:09:49 [sangwhan_]
sangwhan_ has joined #webapps
22:09:54 [Kihong_Kwon]
Kihong_Kwon has joined #webapps
22:10:19 [SungOk_You]
SungOk_You has joined #webapps
22:12:03 [a1zu]
a1zu has joined #webapps
22:12:58 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #webapps
22:13:35 [ifette_]
ifette_ has joined #webapps
22:14:37 [sangwhan]
sangwhan has joined #webapps
22:16:35 [a1zu]
a1zu has joined #webapps
22:16:37 [mjs]
mjs has joined #webapps
22:17:39 [James]
James has joined #webapps
22:19:39 [shanec]
shanec has joined #webapps
22:19:49 [weinig]
weinig has joined #webapps
22:20:32 [hayato]
hayato has joined #webapps
22:22:15 [a1zu]
a1zu has joined #webapps
22:22:21 [Marcos]
Marcos has joined #webapps
22:24:56 [napoleon]
napoleon has joined #webapps
22:26:09 [mjs]
mjs has joined #webapps
22:30:32 [sejinpark]
sejinpark has joined #webapps
22:30:34 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #webapps
22:30:56 [mjs]
mjs has joined #webapps
22:32:01 [smaug]
smaug has joined #webapps
22:32:14 [richardschwerdt-1]
richardschwerdt-1 has joined #webapps
22:40:09 [tlr]
tlr has joined #webapps
22:43:17 [sriramyadavalli]
sriramyadavalli has joined #webapps
22:43:23 [chaals]
Scribe: chaals
22:43:46 [ArtB]
ACTION: barstow should XHR1 be published as a WG Note?
22:43:46 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-633 - Should XHR1 be published as a WG Note? [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-11-07].
22:44:05 [dcooney]
dcooney has joined #webapps
22:44:11 [chaals]
Topic: Websockets
22:44:48 [sicking]
sicking has joined #webapps
22:44:51 [chaals]
AB: We're late, and may cut into the next item. Peter will update on protocol and IETF side, we'll look at other topics, testing, future directions...
22:45:06 [chaals]
PSA: Co-director of applications at IETF
22:45:27 [chaals]
... [quick explanation of IETF structure]
22:46:09 [chaals]
... HyBi WG is a group in my area. Between IETF/W3C we have had IETF doing protocols, W3C doing APIs. (generally)
22:46:13 [krisk]
krisk has joined #webapps
22:46:37 [chaals]
... Hybi has been formalising web socket protocol, Hixie - Ifette - Alexey...
22:46:48 [jihye]
jihye has joined #webapps
22:46:49 [chaals]
... and extensions, sub-protocols, and so on
22:47:10 [chaals]
... Current status is sockets protocol has been approved after last call, is in queue to be published as RFC.
22:47:21 [spoussa]
spoussa has joined #webapps
22:47:26 [dowan]
dowan has joined #webapps
22:47:33 [chaals]
... Think we ha good coordination with W3C on the API.
22:47:58 [chaals]
... Think we want to try to coordinate better from IETF.
22:48:11 [chaals]
... Extensions - multiplexing, compression, are topics people have talked about.
22:48:52 [chaals]
... will come forward in the next few months. Also looking at sub-protocols - I come from Jabber/XMPP, and we want to have a sub-protocol to replace long polling, there are others.
22:49:23 [chaals]
... Once the API is finished I think we will get a lot of experience in the next few years, I foresee a cleanup version.
22:49:30 [chaals]
IF: Maybe a few months...
22:49:37 [dowan]
dowan has joined #webapps
22:49:43 [chaals]
PSA: Maybe. I think we will need one at some point, anyway.
22:49:46 [jrossi2]
jrossi2 has joined #webapps
22:49:56 [dcooney]
dcooney has joined #webapps
22:50:25 [chaals]
AB: Last call for WS API ended about a week ago
22:50:50 [rniwa]
rniwa has joined #webapps
22:51:18 [chaals]
IH: 2 bugs closed, only 2 left.
22:51:18 [mmielke]
mmielke has joined #webapps
22:51:24 [Rossen]
Rossen has joined #webapps
22:51:26 [howard]
howard has joined #webapps
22:51:32 [chaals]
AB: First looks like editorial
22:51:35 [chaals]
IH: Yep.
22:51:57 [chaals]
AB: 14474 been discussed quite a bit, no?
22:52:13 [sriramyadavalli]
sriramyadavalli has joined #webapps
22:53:07 [chaals]
... we could talk about it today. Julian submitted a comment, not exactly an objection. Some URL processing got deleted from spec, added to API - hixie can elaborate on that. We need to figure out whether it pushes us back to last call, along with closing the outstanding bug.
22:53:11 [manyoung]
manyoung has joined #webapps
22:53:59 [chaals]
JS: Sounds like MS is agreeing with 14474 - curious if google has opinion.
22:54:42 [chaals]
IF: If browser sends close frame, and server has meesages in flight before it closes - do those messages get delivered?
22:55:21 [chaals]
... want to avoid half-duplex connections in protocol - one side can send but not receive. THe protocol doesn't address what happens here. Either answer would be OK (dump the messages or deliver them)
22:55:22 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #webapps
22:55:34 [chaals]
JS: And messages in buffer etc...
22:55:39 [Marcos]
Marcos has joined #webapps
22:55:41 [manyoung]
manyoung has left #webapps
22:55:46 [manyoung]
manyoung has joined #webapps
22:55:50 [chaals]
IF: Right. We just need to agree on what we decide.
22:55:51 [jcdufourd]
jcdufourd has joined #webapps
22:56:25 [KIhong_Kwon]
KIhong_Kwon has joined #webapps
22:56:38 [chaals]
??: COmments are in the bug, agree we should just decide one way - don't have two versions.
22:56:41 [chaals]
IF: Agree.
22:57:02 [chaals]
??: We are in violent agreement.
22:57:19 [chaals]
AB: Hixie, do you have what you need to close it?
22:57:28 [chaals]
... would that necessitate a last call?
22:57:36 [chaals]
IF: Think it is a clarification not a change.
22:57:42 [chaals]
ABate: agreed
22:57:45 [morrita]
morrita has joined #webapps
22:57:59 [chaals]
ArtB: outstanding issue is comment from JR:
22:58:20 [krisk]
22:58:58 [stpeter]
stpeter has joined #webapps
22:59:09 [stpeter]
Julian's comment was ?
22:59:32 [chaals]
[Robin waltzes in 30 minutes late]
22:59:56 [chaals]
AB: Is this some kind of showstopper? Is the change substantive enough to go back to last call?
23:00:11 [nvbalaji]
nvbalaji has joined #webapps
23:00:32 [tantek]
tantek has joined #webapps
23:00:49 [MoZ]
MoZ has joined #webapps
23:01:09 [chaals]
IF: Original text was algorithmic parsing of URI. Got taken out of processing, but added into API spec. Question is whether a clear description of how to parse a URL is substantive
23:01:21 [chaals]
MJS: SOunds like a good change, sounds substantive.
23:01:28 [Josh_Soref]
23:01:47 [chaals]
IF: Didn't change behaviour, it is like a clarification of parsing a URI
23:01:49 [stpeter]
Julian's message was "I just noted that as of yesterday, the API spec contains the custom URI
23:02:04 [stpeter]
... parsing algorithm that we removed from the protocol spec a long time ago."
23:02:19 [chaals]
... doesn't change the browser, just trying to be clear on corner cases. Intent is to specify what browsers do, not change anything.
23:02:41 [chaals]
MJS: reads "substantive change" from process...
23:02:54 [chaals]
... personally it sounds like a good change.
23:03:45 [stkim]
stkim has joined #webapps
23:03:49 [jihye]
jihye has joined #webapps
23:03:52 [chaals]
CMN: Would you have expected to parse a URI differently? If not I don't think it is a substantive change.
23:04:04 [chaals]
MJS: If you change the text, you might introduce a change.
23:04:09 [DKA]
DKA has joined #webapps
23:04:18 [smaug]
smaug has joined #webapps
23:04:25 [chaals]
IF: If you did a review it seems that you would have read it in one place or the other. Doesn't seem like an actual change
23:04:42 [chaals]
AvK: At best it is a 3-week difference. Do we need to argue one way or another?
23:05:15 [chaals]
DS: Process is to get good reviw, and resolve difference of opinion. If people don't think there was harm, I don't think that the process requirement is active.
23:05:41 [chaals]
MJS: Last call is for people outside the WG. The fact taht people here like it doesn't matter, it gives a fair opportunity to comment for people outside the WG.
23:05:53 [chaals]
DS: Right. In this case it got moved from one place to another.
23:06:02 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #webapps
23:06:05 [Josh_Soref]
+1 to MJS's note
23:06:06 [chaals]
MJS: Sure, but it went from one organisation to another.
23:06:07 [Josh_Soref]
23:06:11 [Josh_Soref]
23:06:28 [chaals]
... prefer in the case of doubt that we are clear we follow the process, rather than beng sloppy.
23:06:46 [chaals]
... being only a few weeks difference, it sounds like it won't change anyone's plans
23:07:02 [chaals]
ABate: Sounds like no consensus to move to CR, another last call is appropriate.
23:07:24 [chaals]
RB: Operative word is reasonable, I don;t think there is reasonable doubt it would change anyone's review.
23:07:31 [Wonsuk]
Wonsuk has joined #webapps
23:07:31 [chaals]
DS: Think ths call is up to the chairs
23:07:43 [Josh_Soref]
23:07:47 [Josh_Soref]
23:07:54 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
23:07:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
23:08:05 [James]
James has joined #webapps
23:08:42 [chaals]
CMN: Anyone object moving through to CR, and claiming the change is not actually one that would materially affect a review?
23:08:46 [chaals]
[no objection]
23:09:02 [chaals]
RESOLUTION: We don't need to return to Last Call.
23:09:25 [ArtB]
ACTION: barstow start a CfC to publish a CR of WebSockets API (after Hixie closes 14474)
23:09:26 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-634 - Start a CfC to publish a CR of WebSockets API (after Hixie closes 14474) [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-11-07].
23:09:34 [chaals]
ABate: Shipping implementation of WS we also submitted some test cases. To test, you need a websocket server - we have a temporary server hosted.
23:10:09 [chaals]
... getting that hosted by W3C and letting others build test that run on the server side seems essential. Can W3C / systems team figure out how we deliver that?
23:10:36 [ArtB]
ACTION: barstow work with Chaals and the Team re infrastructure to test WebSockets API
23:10:37 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-635 - Work with Chaals and the Team re infrastructure to test WebSockets API [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-11-07].
23:10:40 [chaals]
s/deliver that/we get the server hosted by W3C/
23:11:05 [homata]
homata has joined #webapps
23:11:06 [chaals]
IF: You mean a server you could run internally?
23:11:21 [chaals]
... we have a python thing you could install and run.
23:11:51 [chaals]
ABate: No firm criteria, people want to test the browser without having to run something locally, would be helpful if it could be hosted as well as people having to set up their own.
23:12:35 [chaals]
... Our current server is open source but we don't care much. Key thing is being able to support a server within W3C that people can write tests for.
23:12:52 [chaals]
JG: Absolute requirement that we can run it internally.
23:13:31 [chaals]
... Also running on W3C server is fine. Think the security makes this a reasonably hard problem to solve because it has to be secure - pywebsocket is known not to be secure.
23:13:42 [chaals]
DS: We'd have to check with systems team of course, I can ask them...
23:14:00 [tobie]
tobie has joined #webapps
23:14:35 [chaals]
DHM: Asked systems team. Main thing is to have something that we don't have a lot of maintenance for. I was imagining running a node.js server with sockets, limiting the maintenance required. That could fly, but we need a concrete thing to run and to check.
23:15:01 [stpeter]
stpeter has left #webapps
23:15:04 [chaals]
ABate: So how do we move forward? We're not sur what we could propose, you're not sure what will be proposed...
23:15:27 [chaals]
DHM: Need something open source, ideally something with maintenance process...
23:15:42 [chaals]
ABate: Not sure we have that right now in a way that allows 3rd party submissions...
23:15:54 [smaug]
uh, websocket CR o_O
23:16:29 [chaals]
CMN: If someone has something, let's look at it and see whether it works for us.
23:16:40 [chaals]
DS: Yeah, explain how to run it.
23:16:53 [chaals]
KK: Right. People will test this - so if it isn't being run it isn't any good.
23:17:15 [chaals]
IF: Yes, we need something we can run locally, but don't object to something running hosted.
23:17:26 [chaals]
... if we can run it, presumably it could be run externally too.
23:17:40 [chaals]
JG: If running it externally turns out to be difficult, we could do without that.
23:17:58 [chaals]
IF: Think we could figure that problem out. Let's try to make it happen.
23:18:23 [chaals]
JG: Right. make a decision on a framework so people can write tests sooner rather than later.
23:18:50 [chaals]
IF: Don't hear disagreement, but not sure we will resolve right now which framework we'll use. Someone needs to come up with a submission.
23:19:35 [chaals]
ACTION: Kris to propose a framework for running testing.
23:19:35 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-636 - Propose a framework for running testing. [on Kris Krueger - due 2011-11-07].
23:19:49 [chaals]
AB: Adrian, do you want to talk about future direction?
23:19:55 [chaals]
ABate: not really.
23:20:21 [chaals]
PSA: Seen proposed extensions for multiplexing and compression, heard number of people say this would be useful, so expect to see those but nothing concrete here.
23:20:36 [chaals]
SW: Do you imagine it would be a non-backwards-compatibile change?
23:21:05 [sangwhan]
sangwhan has joined #webapps
23:21:23 [chaals]
IF: Imagine an extension that is negotiated - non-multiplexing client could talk to a multi-plexing server, althugh the server might refuse to answer as policy rather than protocol
23:21:31 [chaals]
SW: Server could serve both ways?
23:21:58 [chaals]
IF: Yes. Client sends handshake with capability, server can accept a connection that works, or reject it, without changing the base protocol.
23:22:04 [tlr]
tlr has joined #webapps
23:22:04 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #webapps
23:22:20 [chaals]
Topic: DOM3 Events, DOM4
23:22:54 [Josh_Soref]
Scribe: JonathanJ
23:22:56 [Josh_Soref]
Scribe: Josh_Soref
23:23:01 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Status of DOM3 Events
23:23:05 [Zakim]
23:23:06 [Zakim]
RWC_WAPI(WebAppsWG)12:00PM has ended
23:23:08 [Zakim]
Attendees were +1.408.988.aaaa, Olli_Pettay, tpac
23:23:09 [Josh_Soref]
... a CFC for Candidate was made 3 weeks ago
23:23:38 [Josh_Soref]
... and ended
23:23:49 [Josh_Soref]
... with Ms2ger Objecting
23:24:03 [Zakim]
RWC_WAPI(WebAppsWG)12:00PM has now started
23:24:04 [Zakim]
23:24:49 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Ms2ger had 3 objections in his email
23:24:52 [ArtB]
23:25:02 [smaug_]
smaug_ has joined #webapps
23:25:37 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: ...
23:25:41 [adrianba]
adrianba has joined #webapps
23:25:43 [Josh_Soref]
... 1. issue 123
23:26:07 [Josh_Soref]
... - by anne
23:26:14 [ArtB]
AB: here is the IRC log from Oct 25 (Art, Doug and Olli):
23:26:15 [jrossi2]
23:26:32 [heycam]
s/123/123, which contradicts DOM4's statement that no new feature strings should be minted/
23:26:40 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
23:26:40 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
23:27:20 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: svg uses feature strings
23:27:36 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: there's the whole substantial discussion about feature strings being a good or bad idea
23:27:45 [Josh_Soref]
... as far as the DOM spec's view of feature strings
23:27:54 [Josh_Soref]
... it only supports a fixed, non extensible set of strings
23:28:18 [Josh_Soref]
... if another spec wants to say that it modifies what that spec says
23:28:21 [Josh_Soref]
... it could
23:28:43 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: one could argue that what DOM4 says is violating what DOM3 says
23:28:56 [Josh_Soref]
jrossi2: I agree that this i
23:29:07 [Josh_Soref]
s/this i/this is/
23:29:14 [Josh_Soref]
... strange
23:29:26 [Josh_Soref]
... i gave personal feedback against removing this from the platform
23:29:35 [Josh_Soref]
anne: among most people, feature strings seem to be a bad idea
23:29:46 [Josh_Soref]
... you can claim to support a feature by claiming to support a feature
23:29:52 [Josh_Soref]
... but not actually support a feature
23:30:00 [Josh_Soref]
... a feature can be composed of multiple parts
23:30:10 [jrossi2]
23:30:15 [Josh_Soref]
... and you can only implement some of them
23:30:30 [Josh_Soref]
... whereas feature detection is robust against this
23:30:43 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: I agree that feature strings as used by DOM are a failure
23:30:55 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm not so sure that the DOM spec should throw out the ability to define them
23:30:58 [dcooney]
dcooney has joined #webapps
23:30:59 [smaug]
there is no robust feature detection for events
23:31:15 [Josh_Soref]
[ scribe lost the correct wording and used robust instead ]
23:31:32 [Josh_Soref]
... and even if DOM throws these functions out and washes its hands of it
23:31:40 [Josh_Soref]
... it doesn't ...
23:32:05 [Josh_Soref]
... "you MUST not" is a whole nother ball of wax
23:32:17 [Josh_Soref]
anne: as a group, we agree that we shouldn't do this
23:32:28 [Josh_Soref]
... but, where else would we put it
23:32:38 [Josh_Soref]
[ scribe is not catching full text, sorry ]
23:32:50 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: i don't think we made this RESOLUTION
23:33:02 [Josh_Soref]
... as editor of the DOM3 spec, I don't think I was informed of this
23:33:12 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: let's do it now!
23:33:20 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: we don't make decisions in ... [cut off]
23:33:33 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: one of the reasons that they haven't been successful in the past
23:33:42 [Josh_Soref]
... is that they weren't fine grained
23:33:47 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #webapps
23:33:49 [Josh_Soref]
anne: so you have to make them more complex?
23:34:01 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: i didn't say complex, i said precise
23:34:11 [jrossi2]
23:34:16 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: if we make them sufficiently precise, you might as well use feature detection
23:34:38 [Josh_Soref]
jgraham: what's the technical reason for this
23:34:59 [smaug]
jgraham: there is no good way to feature detect events
23:35:02 [Josh_Soref]
anne: if event objects are forced to be exposed by webidl
23:35:13 [jrossi2]
23:35:19 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: it's better if events ....
23:35:24 [smaug]
that is event objects, not event types
23:35:28 [anne]
burn the witch!
23:35:29 [Josh_Soref]
... it's better to burn feature strings to the ground
23:35:48 [Josh_Soref]
weinig: historically, in our implementation, we have not been very good at keeping feature strings matching our implementation
23:36:08 [Josh_Soref]
alexr: i want to second that
23:36:18 [Josh_Soref]
23:36:27 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: i'm not going to fight the issue
23:36:30 [Josh_Soref]
... we can remove them
23:36:43 [Josh_Soref]
... jrossi2 : you have the implementation of this
23:36:51 [Josh_Soref]
jrossi2: I don't know that it harms the implementation
23:36:56 [Josh_Soref]
... the extended implementation
23:37:08 [Josh_Soref]
... we've seen some compat issues, in terms of consumers
23:37:15 [Josh_Soref]
... i think jQuery uses it
23:37:34 [Josh_Soref]
anne: i do not, and never have proposed, support removing older elements
23:37:45 [Josh_Soref]
[ the dom4 spec just freezes the old list ]
23:37:56 [adrianba]
adrianba has joined #webapps
23:38:11 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: to get out of this philosophical issue of whether dom4 can tell what other specs say
23:38:22 [Josh_Soref]
... we could define the functions to return true for a specific list of strings
23:38:41 [Josh_Soref]
... [ which effectively removes any relation of the feature to the function ]
23:38:54 [Josh_Soref]
jrossi2: it could be marked as AT-RISK
23:39:00 [Josh_Soref]
... and discussed on the list
23:39:08 [Josh_Soref]
anne: it seems easier to remove
23:39:17 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: no, that would require another LC
23:39:35 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: you can remove features marked as AT-RISK without going back to LC
23:39:52 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: it sounds like there's sufficient resistance to this feature
23:40:07 [Josh_Soref]
... to prevent this group from formally going to CR
23:40:25 [Josh_Soref]
... because the group doesn't support the feature
23:40:44 [Zakim]
23:40:46 [Zakim]
RWC_WAPI(WebAppsWG)12:00PM has ended
23:40:46 [Zakim]
Attendees were tpac
23:41:16 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: I'm fine with removing them if jacob is fine with removing them
23:41:31 [Josh_Soref]
jrossi2: if that's considered a substantial change which would force us to go to LC, then i'd object
23:41:37 [Josh_Soref]
shanec: Issue 2
23:41:59 [Josh_Soref]
[ shepazu reads from the objections ]
23:42:06 [Josh_Soref]
23:42:07 [richt]
richt has joined #webapps
23:42:11 [richt]
richt has joined #webapps
23:42:13 [ArtB]
… Issue 2 is "Second (issue 179), it ignores the consensus about using DOMException instead of custom exception types like EventException, as noted in WebIDL, [3] which I reported. [4]"
23:42:32 [Josh_Soref]
anne: mozilla already removed EventException
23:42:38 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: we have not removed it
23:42:45 [Josh_Soref]
... we were planning on it
23:43:12 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: window.EventException does not exist in my nightly build
23:43:17 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #webapps
23:43:29 [Josh_Soref]
jrossi2: the new exception type was brought up prior to the LC
23:43:39 [Josh_Soref]
... before the consensus of how to move forward
23:43:49 [Josh_Soref]
... and we found them useful
23:43:59 [Josh_Soref]
... since then the feedback that our resolution was incompatible with that
23:44:04 [curmet]
curmet has joined #webapps
23:44:07 [Ruinan]
Ruinan has joined #webapps
23:44:13 [Josh_Soref]
... was after the LC
23:44:30 [Josh_Soref]
anne: that was on a call with few members
23:44:35 [Josh_Soref]
... and I sent comments on them
23:44:44 [Josh_Soref]
... and they were not addressed for months
23:44:49 [smaugN900]
smaugN900 has joined #webapps
23:45:00 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: can we stop arguing about process, unless we have a formal objection on process
23:45:07 [Josh_Soref]
anne: i think it matters on how we develop drafts
23:45:20 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: yes it matters, and in particular, the chairs allowed the editors to screw up
23:45:37 [Josh_Soref]
... the question is whether there's a technical reason to fix what came out of the process
23:46:04 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: if the D3E spec is specifying an exception type which we don't implement
23:46:09 [Josh_Soref]
... i'd object to that
23:46:15 [Josh_Soref]
... i'd imagine that other implementations feel that way
23:46:27 [dowan]
dowan has joined #webapps
23:46:33 [Josh_Soref]
jrossi2: there's already some implementations implementing it
23:46:34 [smaugN900]
we did implement that exception type
23:46:41 [Josh_Soref]
... there are at least 2 interoperable impls
23:46:57 [smaugN900]
but we moved to dom 4 exceptions
23:46:57 [Josh_Soref]
... DOM4 is free to evolve that idea
23:47:16 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: i'm not convinced if 2 browsers have implemented it
23:47:23 [Josh_Soref]
... what matters is what all browsers can implement
23:47:40 [Josh_Soref]
jrossi2: i think that web developers care about previously shipped implementations
23:47:44 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: if we agree to remove it later
23:47:52 [Josh_Soref]
... over time
23:48:00 [Josh_Soref]
... then codifying it will make it harder
23:48:09 [Josh_Soref]
... because people will complain that browsers are incompatible
23:48:09 [smaugN900]
also, I thought it was agreed that D3E will use dom4 exception type.
23:48:26 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: given that D3E is not using WebIDL
23:48:35 [Josh_Soref]
... i don't think there's a normative way to detect this
23:48:38 [Josh_Soref]
anne: constants
23:48:45 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: number 2, it's not useful
23:49:06 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: it's unlikely that users would .name = eventexception
23:49:16 [Josh_Soref]
... i wonder if content use this
23:49:24 [Josh_Soref]
... and checking that code relies on it
23:50:13 [Josh_Soref]
[ scribe repeats what smaugN900 said for the room ]
23:50:21 [Josh_Soref]
anne: there's a desire to get D3E to REC
23:50:49 [Josh_Soref]
... people working on D3E want to get to things to REC and generally agree with the direction it's going
23:50:57 [Josh_Soref]
... but some are concerned about time target
23:51:07 [Josh_Soref]
jrossi2: shepazu do you recall us changing?
23:51:15 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: i don't care at this point
23:51:27 [Josh_Soref]
... it doesn't matter, it shouldn't affect anything
23:51:32 [Josh_Soref]
... except possibly script libraries
23:51:32 [ArtB]
Jacob, here is the IRC log from the call I had with Doug and Olli:
23:51:46 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: which browsers have shipped this, and for how long?
23:52:00 [Josh_Soref]
anne: only one that ...
23:52:14 [Josh_Soref]
weinig: I think WebKit has been shipping it for many many years
23:52:50 [Josh_Soref]
jrossi2: I think WebKit and IE and I thought Opera had passed the test case
23:52:55 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: the final thing is WebIDL
23:53:07 [Josh_Soref]
... i'd like to have heycam speak to how long before WebIDL is stable.. i.e. to REC
23:53:14 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #webapps
23:53:15 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: how many recommendations do you have?
23:53:24 [Josh_Soref]
... to get to rec, you need test suites, and passing implementations
23:53:38 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: regarding normative, instead of informative
23:53:45 [Josh_Soref]
... i'd suggest we go to CR
23:53:55 [Josh_Soref]
... and if WebIDL makes faster progress
23:53:57 [heycam]
s/recommendations do you have/requirements are there in the spec/
23:53:57 [sangwhan]
sangwhan has joined #webapps
23:54:09 [Josh_Soref]
.. I don't want to make D3E gate on WebIDL
23:54:24 [Josh_Soref]
jgraham: regarding testing
23:54:43 [Josh_Soref]
... some things have a tendency to rely on WebIDL
23:54:47 [curmet]
curmet has left #webapps
23:54:51 [Josh_Soref]
anne: how can you not define the binding to JS and still test it?
23:55:07 [smaugN900]
(I think there are still quite a few open webidl spec bugs. and more coming when it is being implemented.)
23:55:14 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: i think we should try to go with what we have
23:55:19 [Josh_Soref]
... and see how far we go
23:55:25 [Josh_Soref]
... i think a snapshot is useful
23:55:34 [Josh_Soref]
... there are plenty of test suites that do not use webidl
23:55:45 [Josh_Soref]
jgraham: there's not a great tradition of test suites
23:55:51 [Josh_Soref]
anne: those specs defined a binding
23:56:06 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: i want to second just about everything that anne is saying
23:56:14 [Josh_Soref]
... webidl defines a bunch of stuff
23:56:20 [heycam]
Presumably Anne is thinking of something like
23:56:24 [Josh_Soref]
... it defines how to implement everything
23:56:40 [Josh_Soref]
... and i can generate tests from it
23:56:47 [karl]
karl has joined #webapps
23:56:49 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: we have 2 passing implementations
23:56:59 [Josh_Soref]
... is it less useful to have D3E actually out there
23:57:06 [Josh_Soref]
... pushing forward on the keyboard model
23:57:27 [Josh_Soref]
... i think it's much more useful to have a keyboard model than some actual architecture astronaut
23:57:35 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: it's rhetorical
23:57:44 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: what's the aim of the spec
23:58:03 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: by going to CR, we can get more implementations of those features
23:58:17 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: the implementers at the table, saying we don't like how it's written
23:58:21 [Josh_Soref]
... we want it in WebIDL
23:58:41 [noriya]
noriya has joined #webapps
23:58:47 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: does everyone agree that it's more important to have it in WebIDL?
23:58:53 [smaugN900]
marcos: really?
23:59:08 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: who thinks we should not go forward before D3E normatively references WebIDL
23:59:43 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: scanning over the normative idl in the spec
23:59:53 [Josh_Soref]
... and non-normatively in webidl
00:00:02 [Josh_Soref]
... they seem to define different behaviors
00:00:08 [Josh_Soref]
... that makes me uncomfortable
00:00:21 [Josh_Soref]
jrossi2: that's a great bug to file
00:00:39 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: who thinks we should go forward with this without making webidl a normative requirement
00:01:05 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: jrossi2 and shepazu against, and everyone else with an opinion of waiting on webidl
00:01:14 [Josh_Soref]
... which was a fairly broad collection
00:01:19 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: as a point of order
00:01:59 [smaugN900]
that is ok
00:02:03 [Josh_Soref]
... i believe we have 2 implementations passing most of the items
00:02:06 [Josh_Soref]
s/that is ok//
00:02:19 [Josh_Soref]
... and i believe in short order that we will have 2 implementations for all
00:02:35 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: i think all of the time that when all of the vendors have said we will not go forward
00:02:38 [Josh_Soref]
... that we have not gone forward
00:03:00 [Josh_Soref]
... i can't think of any times when even one has said no that we've moved forward
00:03:11 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: in general, we don't move to CR without support
00:03:49 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: i think the general sense has been that we want to move forward with specs that everyone will implement
00:03:57 [stakagi]
stakagi has joined #webapps
00:03:58 [Josh_Soref]
.... i think getting D3E to REC would be useful
00:04:03 [Josh_Soref]
.. getting another spec that isn't finished
00:04:05 [Josh_Soref]
... would be bad
00:04:15 [Josh_Soref]
s/.. getting/... getting/
00:04:29 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: i agree with mjs, i don't see a requirement that this group be consistent in its processes
00:04:47 [Josh_Soref]
... i would object to any formal requirement that everything be agreed by everybody
00:04:52 [Josh_Soref]
... i think it's a good rule of thumb
00:05:02 [Josh_Soref]
... as chair, the job is to get consensus
00:05:15 [Josh_Soref]
... and it seems we don't have a consensus to go forward without webidl
00:05:36 [Josh_Soref]
... sometimes we need to acknowledge that we are not that good at achieving our goals
00:05:47 [wangsi-wei]
wangsi-wei has joined #webapps
00:05:54 [Josh_Soref]
jeff: is there a plan to get webidl as normative?
00:06:03 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: one of the things is waiting until WebIDL is done
00:06:15 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: we have an informative WebIDL reference
00:06:28 [Josh_Soref]
... it's just a matter of making it normative
00:06:37 [smaugN900]
does that mean that we give up with D3E and move to D4E?
00:06:37 [Josh_Soref]
... and then waiting for WebIDL to be `done`
00:06:47 [shan]
shan has joined #webapps
00:06:47 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: how much done do you need?
00:07:08 [Josh_Soref]
... what's the comparison in times between WebIDL and D3E?
00:07:18 [Josh_Soref]
dom: processwise, if D3E depends on WebIDL
00:07:39 [Josh_Soref]
... then D3E can't go to REC without WebIDL done
00:07:46 [Josh_Soref]
... we have special rules for HTML
00:07:56 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: that's not in the process documentation
00:08:00 [Josh_Soref]
... it's a policy
00:08:10 [Josh_Soref]
... it's somewhat of a catch-22
00:08:30 [Josh_Soref]
... at what level of webidl implementations can we have to get it to move forward
00:08:31 [dom]
[the policy enacts a director decision, so it's as powerful as the process document afaik ]
00:08:45 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm fine with making changes to the admin exceptions
00:08:52 [heycam]
00:09:03 [Josh_Soref]
... i'd like a bounded requirements on the specifications
00:09:17 [Josh_Soref]
... it sounds like we're going back to LC
00:09:25 [Josh_Soref]
anne: some of these issues were raised pretty early on
00:09:28 [Josh_Soref]
... as in March
00:09:35 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: that's not very early on
00:09:46 [Josh_Soref]
jeff: what does the dependency on webidl look like?
00:09:49 [Josh_Soref]
... i didn't get an answer
00:09:54 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: i think the answer we got
00:10:00 [Josh_Soref]
... is that if we make it dependent on webidl
00:10:13 [Josh_Soref]
... we don't have an expectation that webidl is racing along to webidl
00:10:29 [Josh_Soref]
... shepazu suggests there are a small number of issues before D3E can go to CR
00:10:43 [Josh_Soref]
... if it is held up by WebIDL, then that could be a very long wait in CR
00:10:54 [Josh_Soref]
... we may ask the Director to wave the convention
00:11:07 [Josh_Soref]
... we're going to put WebIDL specs through to REC
00:11:20 [Josh_Soref]
... because we need specs out there to get WebIDL done
00:11:30 [Josh_Soref]
... although he generally doesn't want to use that authority
00:11:41 [Josh_Soref]
... an exception has been granted for HTML5
00:11:47 [Josh_Soref]
anne: what's being missed by your comment
00:11:48 [smaugN900]
(so assuming webidl is stable late next year, D3E could be rec in 2014)
00:11:53 [Josh_Soref]
... is that currently it doesn't define JS bindings
00:11:58 [smaugN900]
er 2013
00:12:16 [Josh_Soref]
anne: WebIDL defines a language and the binding from that language to javascript
00:13:13 [Josh_Soref]
jeff: smaugN900 's answer answers my question
00:13:25 [Josh_Soref]
jgraham: since WebIDL defines a semantic
00:13:49 [Josh_Soref]
... and since browsers implement in terms of WebIDL
00:14:01 [Josh_Soref]
... it seems like not claiming to rely on WebIDL is a lie
00:14:13 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: the number of most recent LC comments was 15
00:14:19 [Josh_Soref]
... and most are pretty simple
00:14:26 [Josh_Soref]
... the comments could be resolved in a month or two
00:14:35 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: so less than a year to get to CR?
00:14:45 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: so LC if we make normative changes
00:14:49 [richardschwerdt-1]
richardschwerdt-1 has left #webapps
00:14:58 [Josh_Soref]
... and then 3 months and then CR
00:15:04 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: so, optimistically?
00:15:20 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: the big time bit is moving from CR to REC
00:15:25 [Josh_Soref]
... it's getting implementations
00:15:46 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: are there specifications that use "all" of the features of WebIDL?
00:15:56 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: for each webidl feature, is there at least one spec using it?
00:16:27 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: is there at least one W3 spec for each WebIDL feature?
00:16:38 [Josh_Soref]
heycam: there is a feature which we'd probably drop that wouldn't
00:16:47 [Josh_Soref]
s/wouldn't/is only used outside/
00:16:54 [spoussa]
spoussa has joined #webapps
00:17:03 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: if we take the RESOLUTION that we make those changes and send it back to LC
00:17:09 [a12u]
a12u has joined #webapps
00:17:19 [Josh_Soref]
... and send it through with the statement that D3E would be LC specifically scoped to those changes
00:17:31 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: does that include deprecating the EventException interface?
00:17:35 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: yes, all three changes
00:17:40 [Josh_Soref]
anne: i guess it's ok
00:17:46 [Josh_Soref]
... but there are various minor comments raised
00:17:57 [Josh_Soref]
... and i'm not sure how they were addressed relating to DOM4
00:18:01 [Josh_Soref]
.. initEvent
00:18:08 [Josh_Soref]
00:18:32 [Josh_Soref]
... there's something which is prohibited, although jackal said it might be allowed if you interpret the spec in an interesting way
00:18:39 [Josh_Soref]
ojan: my general experience w/ D3E
00:18:50 [Josh_Soref]
... is that the push to get it to REC has generally trumped technical issues
00:19:05 [Josh_Soref]
... it's hard to retroactively make it good
00:19:12 [skim]
skim has joined #webapps
00:19:13 [Josh_Soref]
... i'd rather consider it a sunk cost
00:19:19 [Josh_Soref]
... and just look toward DOM4
00:19:34 [kermit]
kermit has joined #webapps
00:19:36 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: are you talking about new features, or the way things are actually specified currently
00:19:48 [Josh_Soref]
... i know i said i wasn't adding new features
00:19:58 [Josh_Soref]
ojan: not adding new features is totally ok
00:20:14 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: so you're supporting anne in not being certain about other little things
00:20:15 [mjs]
00:20:15 [smaugN900]
(DOM4Events, not just DOM4)
00:20:26 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: i've also tried implementing things from D3E
00:20:32 [Josh_Soref]
... and i've had to fall back to DOM4
00:20:45 [Josh_Soref]
... there's good bits in the spec, but i think it's overreaching
00:20:51 [Josh_Soref]
... the stuff that anne 's done in DOM4
00:21:03 [Josh_Soref]
... he's make the event dispatch really clear
00:21:11 [Josh_Soref]
... the mouse/keyboard stuff is great
00:21:21 [Josh_Soref]
... the web is going to be underpinned by DOM4 and WebIDL
00:21:25 [kermit]
kermit has left #webapps
00:21:46 [shanec]
shanec has joined #webapps
00:21:52 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: if as chairs
00:21:59 [smaugN900]
if event dispatch is not clear in D3E, please file a bug
00:21:59 [Josh_Soref]
... we proposed to make an LC with only the new changes
00:22:03 [Josh_Soref]
... are there people who would object
00:22:15 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: i would object because i don't think the process supports that
00:22:18 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: there's precedent
00:22:25 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: it doesn't disallow it
00:22:42 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: i don't want a question, just a technical objection
00:23:04 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: are there things where D3E is in direct opposition to what DOM4 says?
00:23:19 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: in D3E we tried to match what implementations did
00:23:22 [Josh_Soref]
anne: but you didn't
00:23:36 [Josh_Soref]
jrossi2: the initEvent is the only other thing i've ever seen
00:23:46 [Josh_Soref]
anne: if you create an event, what does event.type return?
00:24:03 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: we should leave it undefined until DOM4
00:24:24 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: i don't want to run into issues doing DOM4 because it conflicts we things D3E says
00:24:34 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: D3E is generally a subset of DOM4
00:24:43 [Josh_Soref]
anne: there are some contradictions
00:24:48 [Josh_Soref]
... initEvent, things that are not defined
00:24:56 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: things that are not defined is not a contradiction
00:25:06 [Josh_Soref]
sicking: i'm not worried about undefined
00:25:29 [Josh_Soref]
... just things that it does say which contradicts what it actually does say
00:25:33 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: we can't just do levels/errate
00:25:37 [Josh_Soref]
00:25:45 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
00:25:45 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
00:25:54 [smaugN900]
(I think missed what is wrong with initEvent)
00:26:24 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: option 1: we go forward with the spec, making the 3 changes outlined in the 3 issues
00:26:50 [Josh_Soref]
... and moving forward based on that
00:26:59 [Ruinan]
Ruinan has joined #webapps
00:27:03 [Josh_Soref]
... restricting the LC scope to that
00:27:14 [Josh_Soref]
... there are 3 4 objections
00:27:21 [Josh_Soref]
s/3 4/3 ... 4/
00:27:25 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: are there objections to:
00:27:35 [Josh_Soref]
... we will go through and open an LC with an open scope
00:27:44 [Josh_Soref]
... and with an explicit plan that we will
00:27:51 [Josh_Soref]
... that any further LC will be restricted
00:28:11 [Josh_Soref]
... and we expect to move forward
00:28:59 [Josh_Soref]
... are there objections - One open LC and one further limited to issued raised in that LC
00:29:10 [Josh_Soref]
... there is precedent to that, not in this group, but in others
00:30:10 [Josh_Soref]
mjs: i'm dubious, but i don't object
00:30:26 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: does anyone expect that they're going to keep saying "no, no, no"
00:30:34 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: it's not a bad spec
00:30:40 [Josh_Soref]
... it's just there's too much conflict between two specs
00:31:25 [smaugN900]
what are the conflicts
00:31:30 [Josh_Soref]
chaals: i'm going to table that question
00:31:36 [smaugN900]
one exception type
00:31:49 [hayato]
hayato has left #webapps
00:32:14 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Widgets v2
00:33:18 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: D3E
00:33:25 [Josh_Soref]
AlexRussel: there is a v3/v4 tension
00:33:35 [krisk]
krisk has joined #webapps
00:33:56 [Josh_Soref]
jrossi2: there's a lot in D3E events which is not really for DOM4
00:34:16 [Josh_Soref]
AlexRussel: and there's a question of dropping D3E
00:34:29 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: looking at the Agenda
00:34:34 [Josh_Soref]
... is this the 9-11 slot?
00:34:44 [Josh_Soref]
shepazu: you mean when i'm @WebEvents?
00:34:52 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: how about 10?
00:34:57 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Widgets v2
00:35:08 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: Web Application Packaging v2
00:35:15 [Josh_Soref]
Marcos: I don't remember proposing tihs
00:35:30 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm not going to waste people's time here
00:35:36 [Josh_Soref]
... given the workshop on saturday
00:35:45 [Josh_Soref]
... i think that will determine if we'll have a v2
00:35:50 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm happy to listen to requirements
00:36:00 [Josh_Soref]
... thanks everyone
00:36:10 [Josh_Soref]
ArtB: any other comments?
00:36:33 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: i'm unhappy with the day being Saturday
00:36:55 [Josh_Soref]
[ Adjourned ]
00:37:02 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent: make minutes
00:37:02 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
00:37:26 [Josh_Soref]
trackbot: end telcon
00:37:26 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
00:37:26 [Zakim]
sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
00:37:27 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
00:37:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
00:37:28 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
00:37:28 [RRSAgent]
I see 5 open action items saved in :
00:37:28 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Art to talk to Doug about the traversal from Element Traversal to DOM4 [1]
00:37:28 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
00:37:28 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: barstow should XHR1 be published as a WG Note? [2]
00:37:28 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
00:37:28 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: barstow start a CfC to publish a CR of WebSockets API (after Hixie closes 14474) [3]
00:37:28 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
00:37:28 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: barstow work with Chaals and the Team re infrastructure to test WebSockets API [4]
00:37:28 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
00:37:28 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Kris to propose a framework for running testing. [5]
00:37:28 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
00:37:47 [ihilerio]
ihilerio has left #webapps