17:44:24 RRSAgent has joined #html-wg
17:44:24 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/11/04-html-wg-irc
17:44:36 RRSAgent, make minutes
17:44:36 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/04-html-wg-minutes.html MikeSmith
17:47:48 a1zu has joined #html-wg
17:48:08 si-wei has joined #html-wg
17:49:50 HadleyBeeman has joined #html-wg
17:50:07 changes: hixie: Change how nested clicks are prevented to also prevent click() inside a regular onclick=''. (part 2) (whatwg r6818) <11http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-diffs/2011Nov/0022.html> 4** hixie: Change how nested clicks are prevented to also prevent click() inside a regular onclick=''. (whatwg r6817) <11http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-diffs/2011Nov/0021.html> 4** sam: Call for consensus on issue 164 <11http:/
17:52:35 yosuke has joined #html-wg
17:52:41 itpastorn has left #html-wg
17:53:20 igarashi has joined #html-wg
17:53:48 a12u has joined #html-wg
17:55:52 kimberly has joined #html-wg
17:58:06 abarsto has joined #html-wg
18:00:28 howard has joined #html-wg
18:01:49 HadleyBeeman has joined #html-wg
18:04:14 bugmail: [Bug 14427] Investigate if click()'s click-in-progress should apply to user and/or script initiated clicks <11http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-bugzilla/2011Nov/0297.html>
18:05:25 abarsto has joined #html-wg
18:05:58 samk has joined #html-wg
18:06:01 eric_carlson has joined #html-wg
18:07:18 Stevef has joined #html-wg
18:07:58 jkiss has joined #html-wg
18:10:52 Stevef has joined #html-wg
18:11:37 anne has joined #html-wg
18:15:44 tlr has joined #html-wg
18:15:48 tcelik has joined #html-wg
18:17:14 hiroki has joined #html-wg
18:18:22 weinig has joined #html-wg
18:18:25 abarsto has joined #html-wg
18:19:05 MichaelC has joined #html-wg
18:19:41 rubys has left #html-wg
18:20:12 dowan has joined #html-wg
18:20:44 RRSAgent, make minutes
18:20:44 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/04-html-wg-minutes.html ArtB
18:22:31 RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:22:31 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/04-html-wg-minutes.html karl
18:22:52 RRSAgent, make logs public
18:23:52 I think there is an issue :) and a big one indeed
18:25:21 ArtB, yes it seems
18:25:33 it should start in a couple of minutes
18:26:20 oopsie even the irc txt log is gone http://www.w3.org/2011/11/04-html-wg-irc
18:31:38 YUMA has joined #html-wg
18:31:56 Stevef has joined #html-wg
18:31:59 jihye has joined #html-wg
18:32:21 JF has joined #html-wg
18:32:32 Soonho has joined #html-wg
18:33:34 scribe: MikeSmith
18:33:40 eliot has joined #html-wg
18:33:43 Topic: W3C Document license
18:34:12 Jeff: discussion of the document license predates my arrival at W3C
18:34:20 bugmail: [Bug 14696] New: This is no longer true: "The end date is encoded as one day after the last date of the event because in the iCalendar format, end dates are exclusive, not inclusive" â so remove ...value="2007-10-20">19... <11http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-bugzilla/2011Nov/0299.html> 4** [Bug 14696] This is no longer true: "The end date is encoded as one day after the last date of the event because in the iCalendar format,
18:34:24 ... so I urge others here to jump in and correct me if needed
18:34:44 adrianba has joined #html-wg
18:34:55 ... So, several years ago, the HTML WG determined that the W3C document license did not work for them
18:34:58 KevinMarks has joined #html-wg
18:35:16 ... and the group came up with a list of 11 use cases that were not possible with the current W3C document license
18:35:23 YW has joined #html-wg
18:35:34 ... the chairs of the HTML WG then brought that list to the W3C Team
18:36:02 ... and the W3C Team took that list of use cases to the W3C Advisory Committee
18:36:27 abarsto has joined #html-wg
18:36:39 ... the W3C AC agreed with the majority of the use cases, but not with the use cases related to so-called "forking"
18:36:57 Ruinan has joined #html-wg
18:36:58 ... which put the Team sort of between a rock and a hard place
18:37:47 ... it turned out that coming up a a suitable license was very difficult
18:38:00 ... this task was handed over to the W3C PSIG
18:38:34 ... which did an analysis and proposed a license that they believed covered 9 of the 11 use cases
18:38:56 ... then later in 2010 we decided that we needed to try again
18:39:21 ... and in the end we came up with 3 candidate licenses
18:39:34 q+ marcos
18:39:39 ... the three licenses try to address the use cases and at the same time address the AC's concerns about "forking"
18:39:41 q?
18:39:46 Zakim has joined #html-wg
18:39:50 q+ marcos
18:40:15 ... I have not doubt that the PSIG left no stone unturned
18:40:26 ... the chairs of the HTML WG created a poll
18:40:55 ... in which they asked the group to consider the 3 PSIG-proposed licenses, and also 2 other more-permissive licenses
18:41:34 ... the results of the poll were that a majority of the HTML WG members responded that they could not live with any of the 3 PSIG-proposed licenses
18:42:21 ... for the other more-permissive licenses, the majority of the HTML WG responded to say that they could live with them, though there was a significant minority that said they could not
18:42:38 DavidKim has joined #html-wg
18:42:51 Jeff: So, where we are at now is that we do not have any plans to change the W3C document license
18:43:12 ... but in another decision, we did great Community Groups with a more permissive document license
18:43:12 q?
18:43:19 q+ anne
18:44:33 tantek has joined #html-wg
18:44:39 Marcos: we have seen an alternative solution, which is that editors publish their editor's drafts under "public domain" outside of the W3C
18:44:53 Jeff: we are on record as supporting a permissive license
18:45:28 ... but the Membership told us by an overwhelming majority (80%) is that when you are on the W3C Rec-track, they feel that needs to not be forkable
18:46:46 Marcos: We have shared documents, and if the W3C doesn't provide a more permissive license, we are still going to be [publishing versions of the same specs outside of the W3C under a more permissive license]
18:46:59 you can't prevent forking by fiat
18:47:27 anne: it seems wrong to me that a secret club behind a Member-only wall say No to us and tell us what we can and cannot doe
18:47:40 ... there is not opportunity for discourse there
18:47:44 all you can prevent is the spec representing implementations that have forked it
18:48:11 q?
18:48:34 igarashi has joined #html-wg
18:48:43 Jeff: I hear what you are saying. There is no "opaque wall" if you are part of a Member org, though I understand that it's different if you are an Invited Experts
18:49:12 q+ tantek
18:49:19 [Jeff asks how many people in the room are IEs and how many are from Member orgs]
18:49:30 q- marcos
18:49:34 q+
18:49:38 Jeff: The chartering of Activities go through the AC as well
18:50:15 anne: The issue is that many of the members in the AC are not even members of this group
18:50:16 ack anne
18:50:21 ack tantek
18:50:40 tantek: as a rep of one of those member companies, I can sympathize
18:50:50 ... I've also been an invited expert
18:50:50 .
18:51:03 ... there is the entire AC that votes on these issues
18:51:14 ... but if you look at the participants in this group
18:51:40 ... I can firmly say that as a Member, Mozilla does support a forking license for the spec
18:52:36 Jeff: part of my philosophy of change is to recognize where there are huge barriers to change, and to find other areas where the barriers are not huge, and work there
18:52:52 ... so one of the reasons we create the Community Groups was to address this issue
18:53:06 dbaron has joined #html-wg
18:53:19 anne: It would be nice if we were given reasons for why the AC said No
18:53:29 ... the AC is advisory
18:53:49 ack dsinger
18:53:59 ... and if the Team feels that W3C should have a permissive license, the AC can be overruled
18:54:13 q+
18:54:33 DaveSinger: I think one rationale was that they want a single specification to reference
18:54:50 markw has joined #html-wg
18:55:22 ... I don't think we would ever have a case where even if there is a moderately hostile fork, the W3C does not pursue enforcing the W3C document license
18:55:29 q+ to mention Mozilla's intent to use CGs
18:55:32 ... so the horse has already left the barn
18:56:11 LJW has joined #html-wg
18:56:21 Tim: one argument is, I want people to say that they are putting their time and work into the [common place at W3C] where we have gotten together to do the work
18:57:19 ... and we are all committed to working together at W3C to work on our specs here, not planning to then take them off somewhere else
18:57:20 the possibility of forking is what provides the social pressure to actually agree.
18:57:55 Tim: the case with forking of code is different, whereas with standards, [the argument for forking] does not hold as well
18:58:16 Tim: I think it's important to not fork but also important to have the right to fork
18:58:27 ... so these are conflicting needs
18:58:59 TIm: I agree with Dave Singer that the license [does not have effect on what actually happens in practice]
18:59:16 ... so I'm not sure we need to continue spending a lot more energy on this
18:59:26 RRSAgent, make minutes
18:59:26 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/04-html-wg-minutes.html MikeSmith
18:59:27 Title: SV_MEETING_TITLE -- 04 Nov 2011 (at www.w3.org)
18:59:42 q?
18:59:43 Iraj has joined #html-wg
19:00:03 ... we should be focusing on doing our actual spec work
19:00:28 Sam: This is perhaps something we can address with HTML.Next
19:00:48 ... so maybe we can focus on that constructively
19:01:01 Kai: Companies have one very strong requirement, which is stability
19:01:19 ... when you cannot rely on the standards to actually be standards, that is a huge issue
19:01:30 krisk has joined #html-wg
19:01:35 ... W3C through its process guarantees stability
19:02:19 ... my recommendation to my own company is that we have to completely ignore anything that comes out of the WHATWG
19:02:36 ... just breaking out of the process because you don't like it is [not good]
19:02:57 Jeff: I do not work for any of the companies that didn't support forking
19:03:30 ... but I know some of the reasons that we given
19:04:03 mjs has joined #html-wg
19:04:12 Jeff: I heard some companies saying that they do not want forking because we want one Web
19:04:20 ... they said they don't want to see the Web get fractured
19:04:23 Iraj has joined #html-wg
19:04:51 ... for example, if some companies said they wanted a Web that has DRM features that are not part of a W3C standard
19:04:55 JonathanJ1 has joined #html-wg
19:05:33 Jeff: I also agree with what David said, that maybe we need to do more educate, to help companies understand permissive licensing
19:05:59 ... and I understand that Tim also supports doing such education
19:06:14 tantek: we all want one Web
19:06:21 ... I think there are maybe some disagreements about how we get there
19:06:40 ... in a past role, I was at Microsoft, and there was a standard called DVB-HTML
19:06:49 ... and what happened to that standard?
19:06:53 Jeff: It died.
19:07:27 lets not even mention WAP
19:07:32 tantek: right. It's doomed to fail. In the long run , the one that survives in the one that's supported by reputation
19:07:33 CE-HTML is very much alive in OIPF, HbbTV etc.
19:07:44 ... I want to praise the W3C for the Community Groups
19:08:14 ... it is our intent to develop the Fullscreen API in a Community Group with a forking license
19:08:27 ... and it is more likely that for [new work we do] we are going to choose to pursue those in a Community Group
19:08:57 Jeff: one small clarification, I was neither taking a position for or against forking licenses
19:08:57 .
19:09:12 ... I was sharing what I heard
19:09:20 ... this is consensus-driven org
19:09:44 ... we saw a consensus to provide a more permissive license for Community Groups
19:09:55 rrsagent, draft minutes
19:09:55 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/04-html-wg-minutes.html JonathanJ1
19:09:56 Title: SV_MEETING_TITLE -- 04 Nov 2011 (at www.w3.org)
19:10:00 Iraj has joined #html-wg
19:10:12 ... but we did not yet see a consensus to provide a more permissive license for Working Groups
19:10:22 ... but that could change and we could revisit it
19:10:27 RRSAgent, make minutes
19:10:27 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/04-html-wg-minutes.html MikeSmith
19:10:28 Title: SV_MEETING_TITLE -- 04 Nov 2011 (at www.w3.org)
19:11:12 meeting: HTML WG f2f
19:11:19 RRSAgent, make minutes
19:11:19 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/04-html-wg-minutes.html MikeSmith
19:11:20 Title: SV_MEETING_TITLE -- 04 Nov 2011 (at www.w3.org)
19:12:20 scribe: krisk
19:12:37 TOPIC: HTML.NEXT
19:12:47 jun_ has joined #html-wg
19:12:49 --> http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/next HTML next wiki
19:12:50 Title: HTML/next - W3C Wiki (at www.w3.org)
19:12:51 aizu has joined #html-wg
19:12:58 Tom has joined #html-wg
19:13:19 mikesmith: This meeting is to talk about what features we could add to the next version of html
19:13:24 jkiss has joined #html-wg
19:13:42 samruby: the wiki is a location to store and track items we could potentially do in HTML.NEXT
19:13:51 ...this was last updated in june
19:14:13 magnus has joined #html-wg
19:14:34 tantek: when we re-charted can we move the wiki?
19:14:58 paulcotton: Can you give a rational why to move?
19:15:19 tlr has joined #html-wg
19:15:23 tantek: it'll lower the cost to collaborate with other w3c groups (less logins..etc..)
19:15:45 mikesmith: all you need is a w3c user/password for w3c wiki's
19:16:12 ...though html requires a HTML WG account to update the html wiki
19:16:42 karl: people were not comfortable using the wiki
19:16:57 samruby: Is the content updated on the HTML.NEXT wiki?
19:17:24 tlrobinson has joined #html-wg
19:17:43 a shorter list of possible HTML.Next features from my recent presentation: http://www.w3.org/2011/Talks/TPAC/HTML5/#(15)
19:17:44 Title: HTML WG Update (at www.w3.org)
19:17:50 davidslinger: these are all good items - though we should also start to add issues that we have with the current HTML5 spec to this wiki
19:18:13 s/karl: people/karl: the main wiki was initially created for SW community, "forked" by QA WG, then more general including documentation. Some people/
19:18:15 Mikesmith: we have a bugzilla to track html.next bugs
19:18:20 per mikesmith's point about w3c's wiki being more open/accessible - I see that as an advantage.
19:18:27 slinger: can we add a link to this from the wiki?
19:18:47 samruby: I'm not concerned with where it's at rather that we have it all in one place
19:19:03 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/describecomponents.cgi?product=HTML.next
19:19:04 Title: Components for HTML.next (at www.w3.org)
19:19:20 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=HTML.next&component=default&resolution=---
19:19:22 Title: Bug List (at www.w3.org)
19:19:55 jamesgraham: to add some of these we'll need components
19:20:13 Title: Components for HTML.next (at www.w3.org)
19:20:45 shelly: I have another feature - make sure that all aria roles are in the spec
19:21:20 samruby: can you either open a bug or on the wik - indifferent which type, but it should exist
19:21:25 KevinMarks has joined #html-wg
19:21:53 anne: components are in webapps, but it should use the parser so it should be html
19:22:34 plh: web intents - wants a new element, html may want to look into this as well for HTML.NEXT
19:22:48 q?
19:22:56 q-
19:23:05 q+ to say we don't need the intents element anyway
19:23:14 samruby: they are creating an new element?
19:23:15 ack kai
19:23:29 let's not rathole on intents please
19:23:35 jamesgraham: if they are breaking the parser that seems like a very bad idea
19:24:12 --> http://webintents.org/ Web Intents
19:24:12 mikesmith: they don't have spec document, rather it's just a document
19:24:19 mikesmith: I don't think he needed the intent element, he could have used the meta element
19:24:23 ...though they are using a new element it could easily be a meta element
19:24:40 samruby: bugzilla and wiki seems very light...
19:25:22 mikesmith: see the link that mike posted about potential html.next features
19:25:31 http://www.w3.org/2011/Talks/TPAC/HTML5/#(15)
19:25:32 Title: HTML WG Update (at www.w3.org)
19:25:43 adrianba_ has joined #html-wg
19:25:47 mikesmith: input mode?
19:26:02 aizu has joined #html-wg
19:26:13 mikesmith: mobile browsers seem to have this use case
19:26:15 Stevef has joined #html-wg
19:26:27 mikesmith: one item that hixie removed from html5, is the datagrid
19:26:30 gang has joined #html-wg
19:26:33 rrsagent, pointer
19:26:33 See http://www.w3.org/2011/11/04-html-wg-irc#T19-26-33
19:26:43 KevinMarks has joined #html-wg
19:26:54 mikesmith: some media items...
19:27:12 ... playback statistics
19:27:30 ..api media additions
19:28:21 Stevef_ has joined #html-wg
19:28:30 samruby: not only datagrid is on the wiki
19:28:55