IRC log of dap on 2012-07-10

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:14:16 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dap
13:14:16 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:14:18 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
13:14:18 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #dap
13:14:20 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be DAP
13:14:20 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see UW_DAP()9:30AM scheduled to start in 16 minutes
13:14:21 [trackbot]
Meeting: Device APIs Working Group Teleconference
13:14:21 [trackbot]
Date: 10 July 2012
13:14:51 [fjh]
Meeting: Device APIs Working Group Face-Face 10-12 July 2012, Burlington MA
13:15:15 [fjh]
13:15:52 [fjh]
Chair: Robin_Berjon, Frederick_Hirsch
13:16:04 [fjh]
Present+ Robin_Berjon, Frederick_Hirsch
13:16:08 [fjh]
rrsagent, generate minutes
13:16:08 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate fjh
13:25:35 [fjh]
zakim, who is here?
13:25:35 [Zakim]
UW_DAP()9:30AM has not yet started, fjh
13:25:37 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, fjh, Paul_Kinlan, Josh_Soref, lgombos, mounir, hiroto, trackbot, dom
13:29:20 [a12u]
a12u has joined #dap
13:49:33 [jgiraud]
jgiraud has joined #dap
13:49:39 [jgiraud]
Present+ jerome_giraud
13:53:36 [nwidell]
nwidell has joined #dap
13:54:23 [Zakim]
UW_DAP()9:30AM has now started
13:54:31 [Zakim]
+ +1.858.651.aaaa
13:57:40 [jun]
jun has joined #dap
13:59:37 [shan]
shan has joined #dap
14:00:11 [ArtB]
ArtB has joined #dap
14:02:43 [Cathy]
Cathy has joined #dap
14:04:58 [youenn]
youenn has joined #dap
14:05:09 [aizu]
aizu has joined #dap
14:05:29 [kensaku]
kensaku has joined #dap
14:05:29 [Milan]
Milan has joined #dap
14:05:36 [dcheng3]
dcheng3 has joined #dap
14:06:42 [Josh_Soref]
Scribe: Josh_Soref
14:06:52 [darobin]
darobin has joined #dap
14:07:02 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Welcome
14:07:18 [Josh_Soref]
Fjh: restrooms are outside
14:07:33 [dsr]
dsr has joined #dap
14:07:41 [Josh_Soref]
... There's a cafeteria down the hall
14:07:48 [Josh_Soref]
... We should use it
14:08:00 [Josh_Soref]
James: James Hawkins
14:08:07 [Josh_Soref]
... At Google
14:08:23 [Josh_Soref]
... I'm interested in WebIntents
14:08:36 [richt]
richt has joined #dap
14:08:45 [Josh_Soref]
Dsr: Dave Raggett
14:08:52 [Josh_Soref]
... W3C
14:09:12 [Josh_Soref]
... I'm measured on recommendations per minute
14:09:53 [Josh_Soref]
Jerome: Jerome Giraud
14:10:00 [Josh_Soref]
... Orange
14:10:47 [Josh_Soref]
... Global interest apis
14:10:59 [richt]
s/Jerome: Jerome Giraud/jgiraud: Jerome Giraud/
14:11:05 [Zakim]
+ +
14:11:18 [Josh_Soref]
Milan: Milan Patel
14:11:19 [fjh]
zakim, who is here?
14:11:19 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +1.858.651.aaaa, +
14:11:20 [Zakim]
On IRC I see richt, dsr, darobin, dcheng3, Milan, kensaku, aizu, youenn, Cathy, ArtB, shan, jun, nwidell, jgiraud, a12u, Zakim, RRSAgent, fjh, Paul_Kinlan, Josh_Soref, lgombos,
14:11:20 [Zakim]
... mounir, hiroto_away, trackbot, dom
14:11:23 [Josh_Soref]
... Huawei
14:11:32 [fjh]
zakim, code?
14:11:32 [Zakim]
the conference code is 3279 (tel:+1.617.761.6200, fjh
14:11:45 [nwidell]
zakim, aabb is nwidell
14:11:45 [Zakim]
+nwidell; got it
14:11:57 [Josh_Soref]
... Standards, W3C is in my area
14:11:59 [Zakim]
+ +358.718.00aacc
14:12:18 [Josh_Soref]
... Within DAP, WebIntents are my main interest
14:12:30 [lgombos__]
lgombos__ has joined #dap
14:12:48 [Josh_Soref]
Cathy: Cathy Chan, Nokia
14:13:18 [Josh_Soref]
Lgombos: Lazlo Gombos
14:13:23 [Josh_Soref]
... Nokia
14:13:27 [Cathy]
14:13:41 [Josh_Soref]
Richt: Richard Tibet
14:13:46 [Josh_Soref]
... Opera
14:13:48 [darobin]
14:14:00 [Paul_Kinlan]
Paul_Kinlan is joining now, just need to find a room
14:14:02 [Josh_Soref]
... I lead extensions and device apis
14:14:14 [Josh_Soref]
... Interested in WebIntents
14:14:19 [Josh_Soref]
... And sensors
14:14:41 [darobin]
ScribeNick: richt
14:14:43 [richt]
ScribeNick: richt
14:14:53 [richt]
Josh_Soref: Josh Soref
14:14:58 [richt]
...interested in web intents.
14:15:07 [richt]
fjh: Frederick Hersh
14:15:13 [richt]
darobin: Robin Berjon
14:15:15 [fjh]
14:15:27 [darobin]
youenn: Youenn Fablet
14:15:32 [richt] with Frederick and interested in everything.
14:16:01 [youenn]
youenn: Youenn Fablet, Canon, interested in Web Intents and media capture API
14:16:03 [richt]
kensaku: Ken Saku
14:16:04 [richt]
14:16:17 [richt]
...Web Intents
14:16:17 [fjh]
s/Hirsch/Hirsch, Nokia, co-chairing this WG, interested in everything in this group
14:16:33 [richt]
s/...Web Intents/...interested in Web Intents/
14:16:40 [Wonsuk]
Wonsuk has joined #dap
14:16:51 [Wonsuk]
Present+ Wonsuk_Lee
14:16:59 [kensaku]
s/Ken Saku/Kensaku Komatsu/
14:17:07 [richt]
Naoyuki Sato, Sony
14:17:10 [fjh]
interested in combination of web with home networks
14:17:15 [richt]
(not on IRC)
14:17:33 [fjh]
hiroyuki aizu
14:17:38 [dsr]
Present+ Dave_Raggett
14:17:39 [richt]
a12u: Aizu
14:18:01 [richt]
...interest is in Web Intents / integration of home network / cloud services.
14:18:10 [jun]
Jun Fujisawa
14:18:11 [darobin]
jun: Jun Fujisawa, Canon
14:18:52 [richt]
...interested in 2 things: inter-device communication based on e.g. Web Intents. Printing from camera or displaying camera content on TV.
14:19:01 [Zakim]
14:19:05 [richt]
...second interest: an advanced media capture API. A Camera API.
14:19:50 [richt]
...Canon hope to officially be a member of DAP shortly. Currently attending as an observer.
14:19:58 [darobin]
Zakim, [GVoice] is Paul_Kinlan
14:19:58 [Zakim]
+Paul_Kinlan; got it
14:20:12 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, who is on the call?
14:20:12 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +1.858.651.aaaa, nwidell, +358.718.00aacc, Paul_Kinlan
14:20:15 [Paul_Kinlan]
Zakim: thanks.
14:20:23 [richt]
dcheng3: Diana Cheng, Vodafone
14:20:28 [Jungkee]
Jungkee has joined #dap
14:20:40 [richt]
...interested in Web Intents, Network Information API, Sensors.
14:20:42 [Jungkee]
Present+ Jungkee_Song
14:21:00 [nwidell]
Present+ Niklas_Widell
14:21:04 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, where is +1858
14:21:04 [Zakim]
Josh_Soref, I do not see a party named 'where'. If you meant to ask a question you need to add '?'
14:21:09 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, where is +1858?
14:21:09 [Zakim]
North American dialing code 1.858 is California
14:21:28 [richt]
...main interest in Web Intents.
14:21:48 [richt]
Wonsuk: Wonsuk Lee, Samsung
14:22:03 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, who is making noise?
14:22:06 [richt]
...participate in Tizen group. Samsung interested in all of the Device APIs.
14:22:15 [Zakim]
Josh_Soref, listening for 11 seconds I could not identify any sounds
14:22:17 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:22:17 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
14:22:36 [richt]
...Contact and Calendar APIs are particularly important to us.
14:22:57 [Josh_Soref]
s/Zakim: thanks.//
14:22:58 [richt]
Tizen wants to bring more advanced APIs to the web for richer experiences.
14:23:21 [Josh_Soref]
14:23:30 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:23:30 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
14:23:36 [darobin]
Jungkee: Jungkee Song
14:23:43 [richt]
...Working on Tizen as well. Working on Gallery API based on Web Intents. Interested in additional Web Intents-based APIs.
14:23:46 [fjh]
14:23:52 [fjh]
zakim, who is here?
14:23:52 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +1.858.651.aaaa, nwidell, +358.718.00aacc, Paul_Kinlan
14:23:52 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Jungkee, Wonsuk, lgombos__, richt, dsr, darobin, dcheng3, Milan, kensaku, aizu, youenn, Cathy, ArtB, shan, jun, nwidell, jgiraud, a12u, Zakim, RRSAgent, fjh,
14:23:55 [Zakim]
... Paul_Kinlan, Josh_Soref, lgombos, mounir, hiroto_away, trackbot, dom
14:24:07 [richt]
Topic: Phone Introductions
14:24:29 [naoyuki]
naoyuki has joined #dap
14:24:33 [richt]
nwidell: Niklas Widell
14:24:48 [richt]
...interest in Web Intents, Sensor APIs and Capture parts.
14:24:57 [richt]
Paul_Kinlan: Paul Kinlan, Google.
14:25:01 [richt]
...primarily interested in Web Intents.
14:25:17 [darobin]
Giri Mandyam
14:25:43 [richt]
s/Giri Mandyam/Giri Mandyam, Qualcomm/
14:25:46 [richt]
(not on IRC)
14:26:06 [richt]
Introductions done.
14:26:09 [darobin]
"We have particular interest in the work of the Media Capture Task Force, and will also be very interested in the progress of other specifications such as the Network Info API and Web Intents."
14:26:20 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, aacc is [Host]
14:26:20 [Zakim]
+[Host]; got it
14:26:40 [shan]
s/... main interest in Web Intents./shan: Soonbo Han, LG Electronics, main interest is Web Intents/
14:27:32 [richt]
Topic: Agenda review
14:27:57 [richt]
[fjh runs through the proposed meeting agenda]
14:29:51 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, [Host] contains dsr, fjh, Josh_Soref, darobin, shan, lgombos, Milan, richt, kensaku, Cathy, jgiraud, aizu, dcheng3, youenn
14:29:51 [Zakim]
+dsr, fjh, Josh_Soref, darobin, shan, lgombos, Milan, richt, kensaku, Cathy, jgiraud, aizu, dcheng3, youenn; got it
14:30:10 [richt]
fjh: Any suggestions on the agenda just ping me offline.
14:30:13 [richt]
Agenda approved.
14:30:51 [shan]
+Present Soonbo_Han
14:32:12 [richt]
fjh: Welcome to all new members of the working group.
14:32:42 [darobin]
ACTION: dsr to check out why chairs got an email to announce Sony joining group but they're not listed in DBWG
14:32:42 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-548 - Check out why chairs got an email to announce Sony joining group but they're not listed in DBWG [on Dave Raggett - due 2012-07-17].
14:33:00 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Minutes Approval
14:33:08 [richt]
ScribeNick: Josh_Soref
14:33:23 [fjh]
Approve minutes from 27 June
14:33:23 [fjh]
14:33:23 [fjh]
proposed RESOLUTION: Minutes from 27 June 2012 are approved
14:33:32 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: Minutes from 27 June 2012 are approved
14:33:43 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: HTML Media Capture
14:33:45 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: we have a draft
14:33:48 [Josh_Soref]
... i did a CfC
14:33:54 [Josh_Soref]
... no one complained
14:34:00 [Josh_Soref]
... i believe Anssi was supportive
14:34:04 [Josh_Soref]
... we have a 4 week LC
14:34:10 [Josh_Soref]
... there's a 3 week minimum
14:34:22 [fjh]
CfC for Last Call:
14:34:22 [fjh]
proposed RESOLUTION: publish HTML Media Capture as Last Call on 12 July 2012 with
14:34:22 [fjh]
four week Last Call period ending 9 August 2012.
14:34:42 [Josh_Soref]
richt: how are we on implementation?
14:34:48 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: we have roughly 2 not quite complete
14:34:57 [Josh_Soref]
... we might go to CR w/ things AT-RISK
14:35:33 [Josh_Soref]
... the HTML INPUT Element extension
14:35:41 [Josh_Soref]
... we don't have fully interoperable implementations
14:35:48 [Josh_Soref]
... there's a lot of interest in implementing this
14:36:01 [Josh_Soref]
... i get the sense from browser implementers that they don't care about the syntax
14:36:10 [Josh_Soref]
... everyone says we don't care what it looks
14:36:12 [Josh_Soref]
... like
14:36:16 [Josh_Soref]
... there's pressure from CoreMob
14:36:21 [Josh_Soref]
... dear-dap please ship it
14:36:28 [Josh_Soref]
richt: theory should be document current practice
14:36:35 [Josh_Soref]
dsr: plh is keen for us as we go to LC
14:36:41 [Josh_Soref]
... to get feedback from the HTML WG
14:36:54 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: the only feedback from the HTML WG would be "this should be in our spec"
14:37:14 [darobin]
[I note that that was a jocular comment]
14:37:17 [Josh_Soref]
[ Scribe notes that the HTML WG expressed some interest in California in not owning everything ]
14:38:11 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: publish HTML Media Capture as Last Call on 12 July 2012 with four week Last Call period ending 9 August 2012.
14:38:35 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Battery
14:38:42 [darobin];publishDate=2012-07-12;lcEnd=2012-08-09;previousPublishDate=2012-05-29;previousMaturity=WD
14:38:46 [fjh]
Battery in CR ;
14:38:46 [fjh]
open actions to produce test cases; ACTION-522, ACTION-523 able to exit CR after 1 July.
14:38:47 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: Battery is in CR
14:38:53 [fjh]
14:38:53 [trackbot]
ACTION-522 -- Robin Berjon to write tests for Battery -- due 2012-03-28 -- OPEN
14:38:53 [trackbot]
14:38:58 [fjh]
14:38:59 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: Battery is in CR
14:39:04 [Josh_Soref]
... i haven't finished updating the testsuite yet
14:39:08 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm still updating it
14:39:12 [Josh_Soref]
... i hoped to finish by this meeting
14:39:16 [Josh_Soref]
... those actions are still open
14:39:20 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm making progress
14:39:37 [Josh_Soref]
... i hope to exit CR by end of summer
14:39:40 [Josh_Soref]
... we have implementations
14:39:43 [Josh_Soref]
... a good spec
14:39:45 [Josh_Soref]
... half of a test suite
14:39:48 [Josh_Soref]
... it all looks good to me
14:39:52 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: Anssi will be back
14:40:01 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: yes, that will help as well
14:40:10 [fjh]
plan is to exit CR at end of summer assuming all goes well
14:40:19 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Vibration
14:40:28 [fjh]
Vibration in CR ;
14:40:29 [fjh]
open actions to produce test cases; ACTION-523 able to exit CR after 1 July
14:40:33 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: i think this is similar to Battery
14:40:43 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: i have an action on this from the Test Infrastructure Group
14:40:48 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: not CoreMob
14:40:56 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Proximity
14:41:00 [fjh]
Proximity - latest editors draft ,
14:41:04 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: Paul_Kinlan
14:41:15 [Josh_Soref]
... i believe you were interested in talking about it
14:41:18 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: I doubt it was Paul_Kinlan
14:41:25 [Paul_Kinlan]
It wasn't me
14:41:31 [fjh]
proposed ACTION fjh to prepare CfC to publish FPWD of Proximity API specification
14:41:41 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: i think it was dougt
14:43:05 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: I'll send dougt an email
14:43:23 [Josh_Soref]
... is there any objection to publishing a FPWD?
14:43:33 [Josh_Soref]
... a FPWD is an indication of progress
14:43:39 [Josh_Soref]
... it isn't a commitment to the document as is
14:43:58 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: if there are minor questions/comments
14:44:09 [Josh_Soref]
... we can either incorporate them
14:44:21 [Josh_Soref]
... or into the next draft
14:45:18 [Josh_Soref]
PROPOSED RESOLUTION: WG agrees to publish a FPWD of Proximity API specification
14:45:26 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: we don't need a short name, do we?
14:45:31 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: i think we do
14:45:33 [Josh_Soref]
dsr: yes, you do
14:45:45 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: we have Proximity in our draft
14:45:47 [Josh_Soref]
... i think that's fine
14:45:57 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: Short name for Proximity API will be "Proximity"
14:46:06 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: that's the thing people always forget, is the short name
14:46:35 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: WG agrees to publish a FPWD of Proximity API specification with short name "Proximity"
14:47:03 [fjh]
ACTION: rberjon to prepare CfC to publish FPWD of Proximity API
14:47:04 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-549 - Prepare CfC to publish FPWD of Proximity API [on Robin Berjon - due 2012-07-17].
14:47:24 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: WebIntents
14:47:27 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: we have a FPWD
14:47:31 [Josh_Soref]
... we have an ED w/ updates
14:47:38 [Josh_Soref]
... we have some issues in the Wiki
14:47:54 [Josh_Soref]
... jhawkins, you have some updates?
14:48:08 [jhawkins]
jhawkins has joined #dap
14:48:58 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: we're really excited about FPWD
14:49:04 [Josh_Soref]
... congratulations everyone for helping put that together
14:49:12 [Josh_Soref]
... the biggest part was the last F2F in Shenzhen
14:49:26 [Josh_Soref]
... wrt the Chrome implementation, we've been working w/ UX to address the bad UI we have
14:49:35 [Josh_Soref]
... we're hashing out what the UI will look like
14:49:42 [Josh_Soref]
... right now, the feedback we've got from developers
14:49:52 [Josh_Soref]
... was that they like the API, but they can't ship if the UI is bad
14:50:01 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, jhawkins has joined [Host]
14:50:01 [Zakim]
sorry, Josh_Soref, I do not recognize a party named 'jhawkins'
14:50:09 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, jhawkins has entered [Host]
14:50:09 [Zakim]
+jhawkins; got it
14:50:20 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: do you know when this will be present?
14:50:27 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: I think this could appear in Chrome 22
14:50:41 [Josh_Soref]
... we deprioritize working w/ clients of the API
14:50:47 [Josh_Soref]
... we have a list of changes we want
14:50:52 [Josh_Soref]
... some dating back to the F2F
14:50:56 [Josh_Soref]
... they're nice to haves
14:51:05 [Josh_Soref]
... perhaps something we could be productive on here
14:51:17 [Josh_Soref]
... (disposition)
14:51:29 [Josh_Soref]
... we did a presentation two weeks ago @Google.IO
14:51:38 [Josh_Soref]
... it was really exciting
14:51:53 [Josh_Soref]
... of all the presentations I attended, it had the longest Q/A session
14:52:01 [Josh_Soref]
... we had hallway presentations about it
14:52:06 [gmandyam]
gmandyam has joined #dap
14:52:16 [Josh_Soref]
... we did a Code Lab with 40 developers
14:52:23 [Josh_Soref]
... doing a hands on tutorial for writing web intents
14:52:30 [Josh_Soref]
... we found a ton of bugs this way
14:52:35 [Josh_Soref]
... it was good to get that feedback
14:52:39 [darobin]
14:52:42 [Josh_Soref]
... we need to find a way for people to be hands on
14:52:45 [Josh_Soref]
... writing demo code
14:52:53 [Josh_Soref]
... to tease out some of these bugs
14:53:03 [Josh_Soref]
... Related...
14:53:16 [Josh_Soref]
... mounir posted the WebActivities counter-proposal
14:53:22 [Josh_Soref]
... we could go over them today?
14:53:29 [Josh_Soref]
... I think there are some Issues?
14:53:36 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: we could go over Explicit Intents
14:53:41 [Josh_Soref]
... i think it's sparse in the spec
14:53:45 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: that's a good point
14:53:50 [Josh_Soref]
... the spec has gotten really dense
14:53:59 [Josh_Soref]
... after reading it so many times, it's hard to find bugs
14:54:20 [Josh_Soref]
... that's a plea for editing help w/ the spec
14:54:31 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: are there issues we haven't talked through/thought about?
14:54:37 [Josh_Soref]
... i think there are more implications
14:54:43 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: certainly security/privacy
14:55:48 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: my concern with Explicit intents is that it defeats the paradigm
14:55:56 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: the way we rationalize it
14:56:05 [Josh_Soref]
... in our UI, the user can choose in the picker
14:56:09 [Josh_Soref]
... it's like a client default
14:56:17 [Josh_Soref]
... but the user can go back and pick another service
14:56:26 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: so if you're doing photos, and you do an editor thing
14:56:34 [Josh_Soref]
... you'd land in the editor, and you could go back?
14:56:41 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: say inline disposition
14:56:52 [Josh_Soref]
... you'd have a link to go back
14:56:59 [Josh_Soref]
... [in the UA]
14:57:09 [Josh_Soref]
... also for the window disposition
14:57:17 [Josh_Soref]
... if you know the popup blocker alert
14:57:24 [Josh_Soref]
... in chrome, it's a box on the top right
14:57:35 [Josh_Soref]
... we'd have a bar like that which would let the user to pick other things
14:57:45 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: the client would set the explicit intent
14:57:55 [Josh_Soref]
... all clients could do this normally
14:58:13 [Josh_Soref]
... and users could do this path
14:58:21 [Josh_Soref]
... there's a privacy risk where data is sent on that fast path
14:58:28 [Josh_Soref]
... and the receiving side sees it
14:58:40 [Josh_Soref]
... without the user being able to prevent that
14:58:48 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: that's a concern
14:58:57 [glenn]
glenn has joined #dap
14:58:58 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: it seems people would maybe choose to do that more often
14:59:08 [Josh_Soref]
14:59:14 [Josh_Soref]
14:59:27 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: if you're building an application with an image editor
14:59:32 [Josh_Soref]
... with crop, red-eye removal
14:59:40 [Josh_Soref]
... you might build each component using intents
14:59:50 [Josh_Soref]
... you make those small components available for external clients
14:59:56 [Josh_Soref]
... but you use it for your main app
15:00:08 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: sort of like a manifest for an applicationb
15:00:10 [Josh_Soref]
15:00:20 [Josh_Soref]
... sort of a different UC
15:00:31 [Josh_Soref]
dsr: if it's Same-Origin, then that's less of an issue
15:00:33 [Josh_Soref]
15:00:44 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: i forgot if that section talks about origin
15:00:47 [Josh_Soref]
... for explicit intents
15:01:03 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: this leaves out the possibility of a webintents agent
15:01:09 [Josh_Soref]
... you can do that w/ explicit intents
15:01:19 [Josh_Soref]
... it could be a picker itself
15:01:35 [Josh_Soref]
... we'd lose it if we leave out explicit
15:01:50 [Josh_Soref]
... i understand we could be sending out data w/o knowing where it's going
15:02:01 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: it seems like we have a great model where we have a user mediated stage
15:02:13 [Josh_Soref]
... explicit intents lets you bypass the whole thing
15:02:29 [fjh]
15:02:32 [Jungkee]
15:03:21 [fjh]
josh_soref: could change explicit intent mechanism to open connection, load page, but not share data initially
15:03:45 [richt]
15:03:53 [fjh]
jhawkins: this is a possibility
15:04:11 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: i'd like to point to how Android Intents worked
15:04:19 [jhawkins]
Explicit intents designate the target component by its name (the component name field, mentioned earlier, has a value set). Since component names would generally not be known to developers of other applications, explicit intents are typically used for application-internal messages — such as an activity starting a subordinate service or launching a sister activity.
15:05:14 [fjh]
not security by obscurity though
15:05:14 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: it sounds like this argues for same-origin
15:05:29 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: if we have a solution for privacy that are compelling
15:05:44 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: the notion of a web-intents Agent
15:05:48 [Josh_Soref]
... we've heard it from other people
15:05:53 [Josh_Soref]
15:05:59 [Josh_Soref]
ack me
15:06:02 [Josh_Soref]
ack Jungkee
15:06:10 [Josh_Soref]
Jungkee: i have a UC for Gallery API
15:06:22 [Josh_Soref]
... we can avoid interaction with explicit intents
15:06:30 [Josh_Soref]
... they can just go directly to the service
15:06:36 [Josh_Soref]
... like local storage
15:06:46 [Josh_Soref]
... an service provider provides explicit service
15:06:53 [Josh_Soref]
... and the user doesn't have to pick something
15:07:03 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: why wouldn't you want User interaction?
15:07:10 [Josh_Soref]
... i don't understand why you'd want that
15:07:19 [Josh_Soref]
Jungkee: with explicit, you don't show a picker
15:07:28 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: but why wouldn't you want to show the picker?
15:07:36 [Paul_Kinlan]
15:07:39 [Josh_Soref]
Jungkee: because the user has to choose the picker before picking the media
15:07:50 [Josh_Soref]
... we can give a better UX
15:08:09 [Josh_Soref]
q+ to say this sounds like a need for persisted connections to intents
15:08:17 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: it seems like you're worried about repeated interactions
15:08:17 [Clarke]
Clarke has joined #dap
15:08:30 [Josh_Soref]
... you're talking about wanting to remember previous options
15:08:42 [Josh_Soref]
... i thought there already was a way to do that without explicit intents
15:08:45 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: that's correct
15:08:53 [Josh_Soref]
Jungkee: if a service provider provides explicit urls
15:08:59 [Josh_Soref]
ack richt
15:09:07 [Josh_Soref]
richt: we've also looked at this issue
15:09:12 [Josh_Soref]
... it isn't just an issue for web inents
15:09:16 [Josh_Soref]
15:09:22 [Josh_Soref]
... one issue is accountability through transparency
15:09:37 [Josh_Soref]
... we give users/developers the ability to look through data through logs
15:09:44 [Josh_Soref]
... that's an informal kind of contract
15:09:46 [Josh_Soref]
... it helps
15:09:54 [Josh_Soref]
... you can't just push through crazy stuff w/o accountability
15:09:59 [Josh_Soref]
... if you do stuff with dev tools
15:10:10 [Josh_Soref]
... i think that'll be a factor in trying to solve privacy issues
15:10:13 [Josh_Soref]
15:10:19 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: this came up about 2 weeks ago
15:10:25 [Josh_Soref]
... there's an extension in the Chrome Web Store
15:10:30 [Josh_Soref]
... it's the Web Intents Debugger
15:10:42 [Josh_Soref]
... we want to take that concept and move it into the Web Inspector
15:10:50 [Josh_Soref]
... so yeah, we're on the same page with that
15:11:10 [Josh_Soref]
richt: there is a way of highlighting and putting pressure on companies to not do stupid things
15:11:18 [Josh_Soref]
... if you need to keep your reputation in tact
15:11:20 [Josh_Soref]
.. it's a way to do this
15:11:27 [Josh_Soref]
15:11:32 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: not sure how to do that
15:11:37 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: best practices
15:11:46 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: does the speed bump on privacy data address your privacy concerns?
15:11:52 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: not sure i remember the speed bump
15:11:59 [dsr]
q+ to note that direct binding of app to a component can be done without web intents, so using an explicit intent is presumably to allow user to pick an alternative provider for a component, right?
15:12:11 [dsr]
15:12:28 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: it shows the destination and gives an explanation
15:12:31 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: i think so
15:12:41 [Josh_Soref]
ack Paul_Kinlan
15:12:45 [fjh]
ack Paul_Kinlan
15:13:06 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: on explicit intents
15:13:16 [Josh_Soref]
... we have one relatively big news agency partner
15:13:20 [Josh_Soref]
... they want to use explicit intents
15:13:30 [Josh_Soref]
... they have twitter, facebook, and other
15:13:39 [Josh_Soref]
... they'd like to use the same API for talking to all three sets
15:13:50 [Josh_Soref]
... but they'd like to make the actions clear
15:14:08 [Josh_Soref]
... but these partners want to have the ability to give the user a seemless experience
15:14:16 [Josh_Soref]
... but also give the intents picker
15:14:29 [Josh_Soref]
... there are people who are actively looking to use web intents throughout their whole experience
15:14:32 [jhawkins]
15:14:39 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: would that work with the speedbump idea?
15:14:45 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: i think it's kind of nice
15:14:58 [Josh_Soref]
... i don't think it works right now
15:15:00 [fjh]
15:15:06 [fjh]
ack Josh_Soref
15:15:06 [Zakim]
Josh_Soref, you wanted to say this sounds like a need for persisted connections to intents
15:15:06 [Josh_Soref]
... i think we need delayed delivery
15:16:01 [richt]
s/one issue is accountability through transparency/one solution is accountability through transparency/
15:16:06 [fjh]
josh_soref: agree with frederick, if client makes request to use intent, user agent can persist future requests without repeated picker
15:16:23 [fjh]
josh_soref: this could apply to speed bump case as well
15:16:29 [fjh]
josh_soref: also gallery
15:16:55 [fjh]
josh_soref: thus do not need explicit intent for the gallery use case
15:17:11 [Josh_Soref]
richt: the way android intents work, if i set a default intent, it will always use that
15:17:20 [Josh_Soref]
... if i then open another provider for that intent
15:17:27 [Josh_Soref]
... then the next time i try to trigger that intent
15:17:37 [Josh_Soref]
... i'll get the picker
15:17:57 [fjh]
15:18:00 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: that makes sense
15:18:00 [dsr]
ack dsr
15:18:00 [Zakim]
dsr, you wanted to note that direct binding of app to a component can be done without web intents, so using an explicit intent is presumably to allow user to pick an alternative
15:18:03 [Zakim]
... provider for a component, right?
15:18:07 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: it's dangerous with spammers, but mostly makes sense
15:18:22 [Josh_Soref]
dsr: what's the benefit of using web intents rather than directly
15:18:33 [Josh_Soref]
... how do you explain the benefits of using explicit intents
15:18:44 [Josh_Soref]
... and the benefit is letting users change their mind
15:18:46 [fjh]
q+ to ask whether users understand components of app and can change minds
15:18:49 [Josh_Soref]
... the benefits are same-origin
15:19:15 [fjh]
ack jhawkins
15:19:20 [Josh_Soref]
... being able to change their mind is still useful
15:19:28 [Josh_Soref]
... and for separate origin, there's a different benefit
15:19:33 [Josh_Soref]
... we should clarify the benefit
15:19:43 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: today on the web, it sucks, there's one-one
15:19:53 [Josh_Soref]
... intents solves by providing one-to-n
15:20:04 [Josh_Soref]
... but we can give them this api which lets them still use one-one
15:20:07 [Josh_Soref]
15:20:21 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: to emphasize what Paul_Kinlan was saying about a News sight
15:20:34 [Josh_Soref]
... feedback from someone AddThis
15:20:53 [Josh_Soref]
... is that users won't click on Share buttons unless they see a familiar icon
15:21:11 [Josh_Soref]
... they'll even click the share button that isn't facebook-twitter if they see facebook-twitter nearby
15:21:25 [Josh_Soref]
... doing this makes the migration path easier
15:21:39 [Josh_Soref]
... it removes the burden of using multiple apis
15:21:52 [Josh_Soref]
... 2. moving to the scemantic web
15:21:58 [Josh_Soref]
... with we have nouns
15:22:02 [Josh_Soref]
... with intents, we have verbs
15:22:11 [Josh_Soref]
... if you can call the web a search engine, say you're bing
15:22:15 [Cathy]
15:22:19 [Josh_Soref]
... you can understand which pages are nouns and which are verbs
15:22:37 [Josh_Soref]
... you could have the engine put these things together
15:22:47 [Josh_Soref]
... bing could put the player together in the front page
15:22:53 [Josh_Soref]
... that requires explicit intents
15:23:02 [fjh]
15:23:07 [fjh]
ack fjh
15:23:07 [Zakim]
fjh, you wanted to ask whether users understand components of app and can change minds
15:23:54 [Josh_Soref]
q+ to say that the web intent inspector matches a requirement i listed a while ago
15:24:18 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: it seems like plugging in a random component isn't something the user would be able to fit in well
15:24:41 [Josh_Soref]
... it seems likelihood of it working is low
15:24:57 [Josh_Soref]
... it makes sense
15:25:05 [Josh_Soref]
... but nothing prevents abuse
15:25:11 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: is it easier?
15:25:25 [Josh_Soref]
... you'd have to find something that works somewhere on the web
15:25:35 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: maybe we shouldn't gloss over the problem
15:25:42 [Josh_Soref]
... using intents to structure your app into components
15:25:52 [Josh_Soref]
... maybe it is compelling, maybe it isn't
15:25:56 [Josh_Soref]
... it seems to be for android
15:26:14 [Josh_Soref]
... maybe we make it special for same-origin-explicit to skip the speed bump
15:26:22 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm a little concerned about it
15:26:34 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: we got the speed bump, and same-origin
15:26:44 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: should we action jhawkins
15:28:10 [fjh]
josh_soref: have mail web client which has address book with explclit intent to use that address book
15:28:28 [fjh]
... but I want to use anther book, so first see nothing much, then want to get to other book
15:28:32 [Paul_Kinlan]
15:28:41 [fjh]
... so even with same origin want to go to different address book
15:28:50 [fjh]
... next time get my preferred, not same origin
15:29:00 [fjh]
ack josh_soref
15:29:00 [Zakim]
Josh_Soref, you wanted to say that the web intent inspector matches a requirement i listed a while ago
15:29:20 [fjh]
ack Paul_Kinlan
15:29:36 [Josh_Soref]
dsr: the benefit of same-origin is avoid the speed bump
15:29:44 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: but allow for a U-turn
15:29:46 [fjh]
15:30:32 [fjh]
u-turn is going back from explicit choice to pick after all
15:30:51 [fjh]
josh_soref: pleased that people are realizing my previous ideas were good
15:31:03 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: for explicit intents
15:31:15 [Josh_Soref]
... web intents are typically gated on user actions
15:31:26 [Josh_Soref]
... providing a modifier like a shift key to bring up the picker
15:31:41 [Josh_Soref]
... so that the user can ask in advance to get the picker
15:31:52 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: so if i shift click on a twitter button, i get the picker?
15:31:59 [jhawkins]
15:32:04 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: a u-turn might be a bit awkward
15:32:29 [Josh_Soref]
... it might be written in a way to encourage the UA to provide a way to map back to choosing
15:32:37 [Josh_Soref]
richt: it's analogous to Open/Open-With
15:32:45 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: it could be a browser-user-preference
15:32:51 [Josh_Soref]
... where they say never allow explicit intent
15:33:07 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: that's something we could record in how the spec works
15:33:13 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: it's basically UA Implementer guidelines
15:33:22 [dsr]
(fjh: e.g. a right click for the context menu with a entry for the picker)
15:33:31 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: the concern is that the more complexity you add, the more testing
15:33:51 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: i'm concerned that we should try to solve it some other way
15:34:03 [Josh_Soref]
... i'd like to solve shift click
15:34:16 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: because the client didn't provide the picker
15:34:36 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: you don't know that there will be an intent
15:35:03 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: i think U-turn and remembering the choice is the way
15:35:11 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: i'd like to keep shift-click out
15:35:15 [Josh_Soref]
... i think we've solved it otherwise
15:35:22 [fjh]
15:35:22 [jhawkins]
15:35:25 [Josh_Soref]
... but a UA can still do something like it if it likes
15:35:26 [Josh_Soref]
15:35:36 [Josh_Soref]
richt: have you looked at
15:35:50 [Josh_Soref]
... we could use the context menu, did you look at it
15:35:57 [fjh]
rrsagent, generate minutes
15:35:57 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate fjh
15:36:02 [Josh_Soref]
... having open with with a pop out menu list
15:36:09 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: we haven't thought about exactly that
15:36:16 [Josh_Soref]
... we've thought about those linds
15:36:16 [Paul_Kinlan]
15:36:19 [Josh_Soref]
15:36:28 [Josh_Soref]
... one way is to make the browser involved
15:36:33 [Josh_Soref]
... like right clicking an image
15:36:39 [Josh_Soref]
... share/edit/upload
15:36:51 [Josh_Soref]
... and start adding these integration points throughout the browser
15:36:57 [Josh_Soref]
... and also services, picking files
15:37:21 [Josh_Soref]
... exposing services where you have a button that will call start activity
15:37:30 [Josh_Soref]
... being able to right click and select something
15:37:40 [Josh_Soref]
... unless you have <button intent=>
15:37:47 [Josh_Soref]
... if you have that, i think so
15:37:54 [Josh_Soref]
richt: i think that's compelling
15:38:44 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: say you're in windows and do shift-right-click
15:38:51 [Josh_Soref]
... that's more about content
15:39:00 [Josh_Soref]
... than where the client is calling start activity
15:39:44 [Josh_Soref]
... in a page
15:39:57 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: we've talked about declarative invocation of intents
15:40:05 [Josh_Soref]
... we could do that at some point
15:40:17 [Josh_Soref]
[ Break ]
15:41:00 [Zakim]
15:41:15 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: 10 minute break and then Lunch
15:43:38 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, make minutes
15:43:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ArtB
15:49:49 [jhawkins]
jhawkins has joined #dap
16:00:01 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Agenda Additions
16:00:27 [sicking]
sicking has joined #dap
16:01:59 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: webintents issues wiki
16:02:07 [Josh_Soref]
... namespacing for intents
16:02:15 [Josh_Soref]
... web activities
16:02:52 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: WebIntents Namespacing
16:03:14 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: the proposal is to move the namespace to
16:03:34 [jhawkins] proposal for namespacing:
16:03:39 [darobin]
RRSAgent, pointer?
16:03:39 [RRSAgent]
16:03:44 [jhawkins]
16:03:44 [trackbot]
Sorry, bad ACTION syntax
16:03:53 [jhawkins]
16:04:09 [Josh_Soref]
dsr: there was a proposal on W3 Team
16:04:17 [Josh_Soref]
... which i'll forward to the DAP ML
16:04:38 [dsr]
dsr has joined #dap
16:04:41 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: if we could drop the 'www.' and make it shorter
16:04:53 [Josh_Soref]
... it's 28 characters vs. 22 for webintents
16:04:57 [richt]
16:05:05 [Josh_Soref]
... it's 24 characters if we drop www.
16:05:27 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: 'ns/' isn't self documenting and should be removed
16:05:44 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: this is 'ns/' because it piggy backs on the namespace for xml
16:05:57 [Josh_Soref]
... there's no reason it isn't used for other name spaces
16:06:29 [darobin]
16:06:31 [darobin]
16:06:33 [darobin]
16:06:34 [darobin]
16:06:59 [darobin]
@prefix wi: <>
16:07:01 [darobin]
wi:edit a wi:Action
16:07:03 [darobin]
wi:pick a wi:Action
16:07:04 [darobin]
wi:image a wi:Type
16:07:06 [darobin]
wi:contact a wi:Type
16:07:18 [Josh_Soref]
... they're awkward and we should drop it
16:07:36 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: we all know browse vendors hate XML and we should do everything to avoid any resemblance to XML
16:07:51 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: I don't like ns/
16:07:55 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: I don't like it either
16:08:14 [Josh_Soref]
richt: I don't either
16:08:31 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: for xml ns, it used to be first come first serve
16:08:34 [Josh_Soref]
... come up w/ whatever you like
16:08:44 [Josh_Soref]
... then someone decided it should be coherent, with a dated namespace
16:08:52 [Josh_Soref]
... so we picked years
16:09:08 [Josh_Soref]
... so then you had to use 5 years for 5 different xml portions
16:09:24 [Josh_Soref]
... then we had pushback to use ns/ instead of random years
16:09:44 [Josh_Soref]
... i think we only managed one xml spec in ns/ (widgets -- "very successful")
16:09:55 [Josh_Soref]
... we should avoid the clustermess of xml
16:10:05 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: the goal is to avoid 'ns/' after '.org/'
16:10:16 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: could we have 'intent' as the subdomain?
16:10:24 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: that's asking a lot
16:10:37 [fjh]
that would make sense:
16:10:45 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: one goal of was to have as little after the / as possible
16:10:58 [darobin]
[we could just keep]
16:11:00 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: using a domain to split things off would be better
16:11:35 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: there's "action" and "type" and i don't think we should do anything with type
16:11:49 [Josh_Soref]
... we're doing type everywhere else
16:11:55 [Josh_Soref]
... we already have mime types and
16:12:00 [Josh_Soref]
... are we duplicating
16:12:10 [Josh_Soref]
... that page would have to have documentation on the type
16:12:15 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: it depends on the type
16:12:23 [Josh_Soref]
... reusing for contacts doesn't work
16:12:38 [Josh_Soref]
... has different types for people and companies
16:12:42 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: that's a good point
16:12:48 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: from what jhawkins was saying
16:13:05 [Josh_Soref]
... didn't exist
16:13:12 [Josh_Soref]
... when we looked at
16:13:30 [Josh_Soref]
... we could have subtypes / arbitrary strinngs
16:13:32 [Josh_Soref]
16:13:38 [Josh_Soref]
... we have microformats
16:13:42 [Josh_Soref]
... there are activity streams
16:13:50 [Josh_Soref]
... i don't know that we need to manage it on w3c
16:14:02 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: for apis we're creating/standardizing
16:14:10 [Josh_Soref]
... it's important to control the actual type
16:14:25 [Josh_Soref]
... "image" as a type shouldn't be specified by w3
16:14:31 [Josh_Soref]
... contact makes sense
16:14:38 [Josh_Soref]
... since we need it for the api
16:14:49 [Josh_Soref]
... having the documentation at the same place is useful
16:14:58 [Josh_Soref]
... i recant for certain explicit cases
16:15:07 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: this is for w3 WGs
16:15:12 [Josh_Soref]
... not for everyone
16:15:31 [Josh_Soref]
... if w3c manages all types, then we don't need the long types
16:15:36 [jhawkins]
16:15:44 [richt]
16:15:55 [Josh_Soref]
16:16:09 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: that works for me too
16:16:18 [Josh_Soref]
dsr: there may be some pushback
16:16:24 [jhawkins] -- perhaps
16:16:29 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: one of the things that came up
16:16:39 [Josh_Soref]
... we have actions using
16:16:52 [Josh_Soref]
... we could just use and make it policy
16:17:05 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: there was concern about hosting+ownership of the domain
16:17:11 [Josh_Soref]
... which we could relinquish
16:17:28 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: there is an ownership issue
16:17:38 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: and also branding
16:17:49 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: i don't think breaking existing deployments is a big concern
16:17:56 [Josh_Soref]
... i think it's ok to change it ONCE and never again
16:18:01 [darobin]
ack Paul_Kinlan
16:18:11 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: it's not like we're breaking apps, just reducing discovery
16:18:16 [fjh]
16:18:20 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: it's just string matching
16:18:27 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: i agree we should push it
16:18:37 [darobin]
ack richt
16:18:37 [Josh_Soref]
... the ecosystem is small enough to be able to do it
16:18:41 [Josh_Soref]
ack richt
16:18:48 [Josh_Soref]
richt: i know this was feedback on WhatWG
16:18:53 [Josh_Soref]
... how do actions resolve?
16:18:56 [richt]
how do Web Intent actions resolve? e.g. "//"? Or, a simpler more probable example: if the action is defined as "" and in my web app I use "" from memory. What happens here?
16:19:22 [Josh_Soref]
... we've seen this problem w/ XML NS
16:19:52 [Josh_Soref]
16:20:04 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: v. is this same risk problem
16:20:30 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: this avoids the w3 / www thing
16:20:43 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: this doesn't solve https: / http: problem
16:20:58 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: it's http:
16:21:08 [Josh_Soref]
richt: that's proved very bad in the past
16:21:26 [Josh_Soref]
richt: what about a trailing / ?
16:22:00 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: when you get it wrong, nothing happens, you immediately know your code is broken
16:22:36 [fjh]
josh_soref: we can make things fail more and better
16:22:58 [fjh]
josh_soref: we should make failures clear and obvious
16:23:15 [Paul_Kinlan]
16:23:20 [fjh]
s/we can make things.*//
16:24:03 [Josh_Soref]
s|s/we can make things.*//|
16:24:14 [Josh_Soref]
s|josh_soref: we can make things fail more and better||
16:24:40 [darobin]
ack Paul_Kinlan
16:24:46 [Josh_Soref]
richt: why not use WI:foo ?
16:24:52 [darobin]
16:24:55 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: we tried that w/ widget: it failed
16:25:01 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: the goal was discoverability
16:25:02 [richt]
WI:foo does not have the ambiguity of URLS
16:25:06 [Josh_Soref]
... android uses reverse dns
16:25:08 [richt]
16:25:17 [Josh_Soref]
... they do have shortened prefixes
16:25:33 [richt]
WI: itself could resolve to a well-defined URL.
16:25:40 [Josh_Soref]
... we had a short-form in the spec
16:25:44 [Josh_Soref]
... it was a convenience thing
16:25:54 [Josh_Soref]
... we got pushback from WebApps or WhatWG
16:26:05 [Josh_Soref]
... it was in our initial vision
16:26:52 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: i was talking about a property in the Intent objct
16:26:58 [Josh_Soref]
16:27:06 [Josh_Soref]
... which maps back to the string
16:27:12 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: sounds like we're solving the wrong problem
16:27:27 [Josh_Soref]
... it sounds like a lot of hand-waiving
16:28:07 [Josh_Soref]
richt: you could have a
16:28:16 [Josh_Soref]
... it resolves, people may expect it works
16:28:22 [Josh_Soref]
... or
16:29:11 [Josh_Soref]
... you'll end up w/ half of the developers writing one way
16:29:23 [fjh]
16:30:00 [fjh]
josh_soref: failure , three examples with implementations, with different action URLs, will get separate pick lists, problem when people copy source from others
16:30:47 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: i'm going to put $1000 saying that this problem won't happen
16:31:29 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: to be clear, it isn't ok for the problem to be created by people in this room
16:32:21 [Paul_Kinlan]
16:32:33 [darobin]
close action-549
16:32:33 [trackbot]
ACTION-549 Prepare CfC to publish FPWD of Proximity API closed
16:32:40 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: we could ask w3 to force trailing slashes to 404
16:32:52 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: richt was asking about forcing resolvability
16:33:03 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: resolving and forcing was a disaster for RSS
16:33:17 [Josh_Soref]
... each time was rearranged because it was bought out
16:33:34 [Josh_Soref]
... half the RSS readers in the world broke because they relied on that NS document which 404d
16:33:52 [richt]
So I will potentially have 3 services for, 4 services for, 8 services for
16:34:02 [richt]
...and I'll take James's $1000 :)
16:34:12 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: richt and intents. :)
16:36:14 [Josh_Soref]
dsr: it seems like a job for W3 to be responsible to fail with a useful warning for <https> and </>
16:36:28 [dsr]
(resolving the URI for an intent should indicate the registered string even if uri variants resolve ok)
16:36:59 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: who wants plural?
16:37:07 [Josh_Soref]
[ 6 ]
16:37:14 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: who wants singular?
16:37:17 [Josh_Soref]
[ 3 ]
16:37:44 [darobin]
PROPOSED RESOLUTION: template URI assignment for intents is*
16:37:46 [richt]
my vote was, either works for me but the ambiguity has been lodged in my mind when I write a web app and need to recall it in the future from memory :)
16:38:26 [fjh]
proposed RESOLUTION: template URI assignment for intents is* where * is action or type
16:39:02 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: template URI assignment for intents is*
16:39:07 [darobin]
as noted above, should be as strict in its resolution of stuff as possible
16:39:16 [Josh_Soref]
s/intents is/intents-actions is/
16:39:33 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:39:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
16:40:03 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:40:03 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
16:41:18 [Josh_Soref]
[ Lunch for 1 hour ]
16:41:30 [richt]
lunch with an s or not.
16:55:56 [sicking]
sicking has joined #dap
16:59:55 [sicking]
sicking has joined #dap
17:18:35 [Zakim]
17:42:48 [jhawkins]
jhawkins has joined #dap
17:50:19 [lgombos]
lgombos has left #dap
17:51:11 [jgiraud]
jgiraud has joined #dap
17:52:41 [jun]
jun has joined #dap
17:59:21 [Wonsuk]
Wonsuk has joined #dap
17:59:50 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Dinner Tonight
17:59:57 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: we're thinking about going to the border Cafe
17:59:57 [jun]
jun has joined #dap
18:00:01 [Josh_Soref]
... how many people are interested?
18:00:05 [Josh_Soref]
[ 15 hands ]
18:00:12 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: let's say 6pm
18:00:31 [a12u]
a12u has joined #dap
18:00:48 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, who is on the call?
18:00:48 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +1.858.651.aaaa, [Host]
18:00:49 [Zakim]
[Host] has dsr, fjh, Josh_Soref, darobin, shan, lgombos, Milan, richt, kensaku, Cathy, jgiraud, aizu, dcheng3, youenn, jhawkins
18:01:48 [Josh_Soref]
Zakimm, aaaa is gmandyam
18:02:16 [naoyuki]
naoyuki has joined #dap
18:02:19 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, aaaa is gmandyam
18:02:19 [Zakim]
+gmandyam; got it
18:02:27 [fjh]
zakim, where is [Host]
18:02:27 [Zakim]
sorry, fjh, I do not recognize a party named 'where'
18:02:38 [fjh]
zakim, where is [Host]?
18:02:38 [Zakim]
sorry, fjh, I do not understand your question
18:02:43 [Josh_Soref]
s/Zakimm, aaaa is gmandyam//
18:03:23 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:03:24 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
18:03:44 [richt]
Present+ Rich_Tibbett
18:03:48 [aizu]
aizu has joined #dap
18:03:50 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, Jungkee has entered [Host]
18:03:50 [Zakim]
+Jungkee; got it
18:04:47 [richt]
18:05:11 [Zakim]
18:05:22 [richt]
18:05:26 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Web Activities API
18:05:33 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:05:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
18:05:33 [Zakim]
18:05:48 [Paul_Kinlan]
Paul Kinlan on gvoice
18:05:56 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: mounir / sicking aren't here
18:06:03 [Josh_Soref]
... we wrote up an analysis of their api
18:06:10 [Josh_Soref]
... they're closer to our api than we thought
18:06:14 [jhawkins]
18:06:23 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, [GVoice] is Paul_Kinlan
18:06:23 [Zakim]
+Paul_Kinlan; got it
18:06:34 [gmandyam]
gmandyam has joined #dap
18:06:37 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: the namespace on actions is different
18:06:46 [Josh_Soref]
... they use just the name "pick", "share", "edit"
18:06:55 [Josh_Soref]
.... whereas we use ...
18:07:07 [Josh_Soref]
18:07:15 [Josh_Soref]
18:07:25 [Josh_Soref]
... they're using an event
18:07:35 [Josh_Soref]
... so you can't have the intent payload available onload
18:07:45 [Josh_Soref]
... we've reached an agreement that there should be an Intent event
18:07:48 [Josh_Soref]
... for delayed delivered
18:07:53 [Josh_Soref]
18:08:07 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: i don't think that has been incorporated in the spec yet
18:08:13 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: that's an action we need to have/do
18:08:25 [Milan]
Milan has joined #dap
18:08:32 [fjh]
action: jhwawkins to add event for on load to webintents spec
18:08:32 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - jhwawkins
18:08:53 [Josh_Soref]
s/action: jhwawkins to add event for on load to webintents spec//
18:08:59 [Josh_Soref]
s/Sorry, couldn't find user - jhwawkins//
18:09:05 [fjh]
action: jhawkins to add event for on load to webintents spec
18:09:05 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - jhawkins
18:09:09 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:09:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
18:09:31 [fjh]
action: jhawkins to add event for on load to webintents spec
18:09:31 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - jhawkins
18:09:47 [Josh_Soref]
... activities uses a DOM Request
18:09:54 [fjh]
ok need to do this offline
18:10:08 [nwidell]
18:10:25 [jhawkins]
"A DOMRequest object represents an ongoing operation; it provides callbacks that are called when the operation completes…"
18:10:30 [jhawkins]
it is essentially a Future
18:12:18 [fjh]
18:12:18 [trackbot]
ACTION-550 -- James Hawkins to add event for on load to webintents spec -- due 2012-07-17 -- OPEN
18:12:18 [trackbot]
18:12:26 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: Intents have a way for pages to declaratively register for the Intent without requiring a manifest
18:12:36 [Josh_Soref]
... Activities don't
18:12:56 [Josh_Soref]
... There is a way to programmatically register, but that's a different area...
18:13:35 [Josh_Soref]
... For imperative registration, Activities has registerActivityHandler
18:13:43 [Josh_Soref]
... Intents currently doesn't have registration
18:13:54 [Josh_Soref]
s/have/have imperative/
18:14:10 [Josh_Soref]
richt: I could dynamically add an intent tag to the page, right?
18:14:12 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: yes
18:14:48 [Josh_Soref]
... do i need something in the spec to handle dynamic insertion of <intent> tags?
18:14:55 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: yes
18:15:10 [Josh_Soref]
... you definitely need to check for that, because it's often the case that it doesn't naturally happen
18:15:29 [Josh_Soref]
richt: if i change the properties of an <intent> tag, via JS, what's the intended result?
18:16:25 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: it might be that <intent> should handle this the same way <script> does
18:16:36 [Josh_Soref]
... insertion is honored, but mutation/removal is effectively ignored
18:16:41 [fjh]
18:16:41 [trackbot]
ACTION-551 -- James Hawkins to share proposal on list to handle dynamic insertion/removal etc of <intent> tags -- due 2012-07-17 -- OPEN
18:16:41 [trackbot]
18:16:44 [Josh_Soref]
... wrt. side-effects
18:16:50 [darobin]
ACTION: Robin to send some spec text for the way that extras work
18:16:50 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-552 - Send some spec text for the way that extras work [on Robin Berjon - due 2012-07-17].
18:17:11 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: for delivery, Activities has setMessageHandler
18:17:26 [Josh_Soref]
... and Intents has window.intent (and the Intent Event)
18:17:45 [fjh]
ACTION: James Hawkins to see this action
18:17:45 [trackbot]
Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - James
18:17:45 [trackbot]
Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. jhawkins2, jsalsman)
18:18:01 [Josh_Soref]
... disposition is the same for both
18:18:08 [Josh_Soref]
... and return mechanism is the same
18:18:19 [Josh_Soref]
... activities has postError, intents has postFailure
18:18:26 [fjh]
zakim, who is here?
18:18:26 [Zakim]
On the phone I see gmandyam, [Host], nwidell, Paul_Kinlan
18:18:28 [Zakim]
[Host] has dsr, fjh, Josh_Soref, darobin, shan, lgombos, Milan, richt, kensaku, Cathy, jgiraud, aizu, dcheng3, youenn, jhawkins, Jungkee
18:18:28 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Milan, gmandyam, aizu, naoyuki, a12u, jun, Wonsuk, jgiraud, jhawkins, dsr, glenn, Jungkee, lgombos__, richt, darobin, dcheng3, kensaku, Cathy, ArtB, shan, nwidell,
18:18:28 [Zakim]
... Zakim, RRSAgent, fjh, Paul_Kinlan, Josh_Soref, mounir, hiroto_away, trackbot, dom
18:18:31 [Josh_Soref]
... but that's the only difference
18:18:52 [Josh_Soref]
... those are the differences/similarities we've identified
18:19:05 [Josh_Soref]
... even though we've raised a lot of differences, they're all small
18:19:17 [Josh_Soref]
richt: when WebActivities made it to the whatwg list
18:19:25 [Josh_Soref]
... they raised UCs that you guys weren't raising
18:19:29 [Josh_Soref]
... what happened there?
18:19:38 [Josh_Soref]
... why are they saying different UCs?
18:19:42 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: i know we talked about that
18:19:49 [Josh_Soref]
... we didn't write about it in our analysis
18:19:53 [Josh_Soref]
... that reminds me of another hing
18:19:56 [Josh_Soref]
18:20:02 [Josh_Soref]
... their list of activities seemed to be fixed
18:20:08 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm not sure if that's still the case
18:20:30 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: why was their so much wind on the list?
18:20:39 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: i think it boils down about a few things
18:20:47 [Paul_Kinlan]
18:20:50 [Josh_Soref]
... one is a lot of people talked about things they /could/ do with Intents
18:20:52 [richt]
s/why was their so much/why was there so much/
18:20:53 [Cathy]
s/was their so/was there so/
18:21:02 [Josh_Soref]
... and mozilla thought they were core to the spec
18:21:14 [Josh_Soref]
... but that comes from not reading the spec
18:21:34 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: it turns out their spec doesn't have a fixed limit of actions
18:21:59 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: their spec encourages URLs for non default types
18:22:13 [Josh_Soref]
richt: we shouldn't encourage it, but we should allow it
18:22:53 [darobin]
darobin has joined #dap
18:23:22 [fjh]
jhawkins: reason for URL is so that documentation can be found at URL - expectation and practice
18:23:43 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: we think that the documentation is more important than the namespacing itself
18:23:50 [Josh_Soref]
... there are questions we should post to them
18:24:00 [Josh_Soref]
... it's unclear if setMessageHandler supports multiple activities
18:24:11 [Josh_Soref]
... it's unclear if a user can pick a particular service
18:24:15 [Josh_Soref]
... is there a notion of a picker ui?
18:24:51 [Josh_Soref]
... there were two statements saying "web activities isn't a discovery api" "web activities isn't a communications api"
18:24:59 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: it isn't, but nor is Web Intents
18:25:11 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: i believe this was from the stale
18:25:27 [Josh_Soref]
... because that was documented there
18:25:51 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: sounds good
18:25:57 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: sounds good
18:26:27 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: is that stale document still around?
18:26:30 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: yes
18:26:33 [Josh_Soref]
... i can delete it
18:26:36 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: please make it 410
18:26:43 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: i can't do that, but i will delete it in a few minutes
18:27:32 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: what can we do to go forward without ruffling feathers?
18:27:49 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: didn't greg incorporate some feedback using language from web activities?
18:28:06 [Josh_Soref]
... send a message on web intents suggesting we're done
18:29:22 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: can we have Paul_Kinlan send a message about having deleted the misleading
18:29:42 [Josh_Soref]
... check with greg to see if we incorporated something from activities
18:31:24 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: Activities start with creating a DOMRequest
18:31:27 [sicking]
sicking has joined #dap
18:31:31 [Josh_Soref]
... which is roughly a Promise
18:31:40 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: it depends on whether you have 2 callbacks
18:31:45 [fjh]
callbacks versus objects with event handlers
18:31:47 [Josh_Soref]
... or are going to start having progress and things
18:31:57 [Josh_Soref]
... in which case you want to be able to hang things off of
18:32:28 [darobin]
18:32:45 [Josh_Soref]
richt: web activities could benefit from a lot of the things we've discussed about web intents
18:32:57 [Josh_Soref]
... and it should benefit from within the web intents framework
18:33:12 [Josh_Soref]
... we should have one of the mozilla guys coming onboard as an editor
18:34:12 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: let's start with an email
18:35:36 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: i'll write one
18:36:41 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: one of our issues with Web Activities is that the api relies on 2 apis not in the system
18:36:52 [Josh_Soref]
... System Message Handler and DOMRequest
18:38:37 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, make minutes
18:38:37 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
18:39:40 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Webintents Issues wiki
18:39:47 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: we should move to bugzilla
18:39:51 [jhawkins]
18:39:55 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: can we dispense with those issues?
18:40:01 [fjh]
18:41:54 [fjh]
inline disposition needed and if so is SSL required for it
18:42:15 [fjh]
rational is need for uniform security of all parts of client page, e.g. if client page protected by SSL then also inlined content...
18:43:01 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: this came up @CoreMob two weeks ago
18:43:11 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: i'm not opposed to this
18:43:31 [fjh]
action: fjh to summarize issue and rationale regarding SSL for inlined webintents content
18:43:31 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-553 - Summarize issue and rationale regarding SSL for inlined webintents content [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2012-07-17].
18:43:32 [Paul_Kinlan] now 410 Gone's and reference is removed from
18:43:49 [Josh_Soref]
... but it'd be helpful if someone came up with an example
18:44:09 [fjh]
jhawkins: how is it different if it is in a new tab
18:44:59 [fjh]
jhawkins: have todo item for showing status for items including inline
18:45:39 [fjh]
josh_soref: once there is a security loss one cannot get back
18:46:47 [fjh]
fjh: need the concept of a "secure page"
18:47:50 [fjh]
richt: http and https would be treated as different origins
18:47:58 [fjh]
richt: same origin policy
18:49:35 [fjh]
jhawkins: need to gather info so we can make an informed decsiont
18:49:58 [fjh]
issue event on Intent load (performance issue related to blocking)
18:50:12 [Cathy]
18:53:31 [richt]
fyi, postMessage spec says "if the targetOrigin argument is an absolute URL, and the Document of the Window object on which the method was invoked does not have the same origin as targetOrigin, then abort these steps silently"
18:53:50 [richt]
(before passing the message to the target origin)
18:54:14 [fjh]
I have updated the DAP WebIntents issue wiki to point to Bugzilla,
18:54:22 [richt]
so we should adopt a similar approach with Web Intents.
18:54:31 [Paul_Kinlan]
can we post the contact intent demo to IRC?
18:54:53 [richt]
s/so we should adopt a similar approach with Web Intents./so we should adopt a similar approach with Web Intents wrt http/https message passing only/
19:02:10 [fjh]
19:04:34 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: darobin's Contacts Intent
19:04:48 [Josh_Soref]
[ Josh_Soref demos installing intent ]
19:05:17 [Josh_Soref]
[ Josh_Soref demos breaking Chrome by closing the provider without confirming/canceling ]
19:05:37 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: perhaps we should post an error code
19:06:03 [Josh_Soref]
[ currently it posts an error of <null> ]
19:06:54 [Josh_Soref]
richt: i like it
19:07:13 [Josh_Soref]
... we don't usually target non browser vendors
19:07:32 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: here browsers will probably implement contacts for devices, but they'll be in the minority
19:08:37 [richt]
so the target is primarily web developers directly. I expect most developers don't understand and shouldn't need to learn WebIDL so a different form of documentation might ultimately be more helpful.
19:09:23 [richt]
...for the Contacts Intent
19:09:26 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: tantek sent feedback on contacts a while ago complaining about lack of alignment to vCard 4
19:11:58 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: can we agree to publish an updated draft once darobin finishes editing his draft
19:12:06 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: i think we should publish an updated WD
19:13:39 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: Publish Pick-Contacts-Intent as WD with same shortname ("contacts-api")
19:15:27 [jhawkins]
Josh_Soref: I need to get rid of one of those accounts. it confuses me as well
19:23:48 [fjh]
jungkee gives demo of Pick Media
19:23:51 [fjh]
draft ->
19:24:12 [fjh]
ScribeNick: fjh
19:24:27 [fjh]
richt: what about local intent, is this an issue
19:25:03 [Josh_Soref]
s/Josh_Soref: I need to get rid of one of those accounts. it confuses me as well//
19:25:18 [Josh_Soref]
richt: how are you handling files?
19:25:27 [Josh_Soref]
Jungkee: i'm using URLs, either real or data:
19:26:25 [fjh]
q+ re roadbump and robin issue, break time
19:26:27 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: the problem w/ URLs/Blobs is that the server will have to download the data for 200 videos
19:27:09 [Josh_Soref]
... it'd be useful to have blobs that are lazy pointers to urls
19:27:39 [fjh]
lazy blob
19:27:41 [Josh_Soref]
Jungkee: so when the blob tries to trigger the blob, it then triggers the xhr?
19:27:44 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: right
19:28:06 [darobin]
ACTION: Robin to make a proposal for LazyBlob
19:28:06 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-554 - Make a proposal for LazyBlob [on Robin Berjon - due 2012-07-17].
19:28:23 [Josh_Soref]
Jungkee: i know that there's a search api that this WG has considered
19:28:33 [Josh_Soref]
... i propose string list searching
19:28:47 [darobin]
s/string list/simple string based/
19:28:57 [Josh_Soref]
... also, for metadata, having to define them ...
19:29:04 [darobin]
s/has considered/has considered for contacts/
19:29:48 [Josh_Soref]
... i picked Media metadata based on flickr/etc. as well as Media Annotations
19:29:59 [Josh_Soref]
Wonsuk: we looked at EXIF/MPEG-7
19:30:29 [Josh_Soref]
richt: we should start with a smaller list
19:30:50 [Josh_Soref]
Jungkee: the core set from Media Annotation is 27 properties
19:31:00 [Josh_Soref]
... i'd like to drop some of them
19:31:11 [Josh_Soref]
ack Paul_Kinlan
19:31:48 [Josh_Soref]
Paul_Kinlan: one of the thing the Chrome Apps team as part of Sys Apps Work
19:31:55 [Josh_Soref]
... is to take a File reference via Web Intents
19:32:01 [Josh_Soref]
... so you can get access to raw file itself
19:32:10 [Josh_Soref]
... instead of having to pass around Blobs
19:32:16 [Josh_Soref]
... it's special cased
19:33:09 [vandebo]
vandebo has joined #dap
19:33:11 [Josh_Soref]
... one you get a special cased URL, you can use XHR
19:33:20 [Josh_Soref]
... but you get cross origin issues
19:33:23 [fjh]
ack fjh
19:33:23 [Zakim]
fjh, you wanted to discuss roadbump and robin issue, break time
19:33:24 [Josh_Soref]
... lazy blob sounds cool
19:33:52 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: sounds like the speed bump discussion is somewhat similar
19:34:04 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: it isn't quite the same
19:34:07 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: it sounds similar
19:34:26 [Josh_Soref]
[ Break ]
19:35:08 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: we should publish a new draft
19:35:30 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: We will publish a WD of the Pick-Media Intent with the same short name as Gallery ("Gallery")
19:36:30 [Zakim]
19:42:00 [kensaku__]
kensaku__ has joined #dap
20:01:11 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: History
20:01:24 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: how did Gallery appear in the Charter?
20:01:55 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: Gallery/Contacts were initially requested
20:02:06 [Josh_Soref]
... based on the assumption that devices had valuable local stores
20:02:29 [fjh]
fjh: we assume that webintents can be used for both remote and local services
20:02:44 [Josh_Soref]
... but some of us looked at the world and decided that web stores were more likely to be of value
20:02:49 [Josh_Soref]
... so we wanted apis that could handle both
20:02:58 [Josh_Soref]
richt: e.g. Unified Addressbook
20:03:08 [Josh_Soref]
... not specifying the source of contacts, but combining local/remote data
20:03:20 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: and thus they were added to the DAP charter ages ago
20:03:28 [Josh_Soref]
... and are relevant with/without Intents
20:03:37 [Josh_Soref]
... Intents is just the way we decided would be best to address them
20:03:47 [fjh]
list of DAP deliverables in charter ->
20:03:50 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Sys Apps
20:04:15 [Josh_Soref]
s/Apps/Apps and NFC/
20:04:23 [Zakim]
20:04:28 [Josh_Soref]
jhawkins: what is the relationship between DAP and Sys Apps?
20:04:51 [darobin]
20:04:54 [Josh_Soref]
s/Topic: Sys/Topic: History for Sys/
20:05:01 [vandebo]
20:05:17 [darobin]
ack vandebo
20:05:17 [Josh_Soref]
20:05:23 [Josh_Soref]
20:05:39 [vandebo]
darobin: no
20:05:40 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, who is on the call?
20:05:40 [Zakim]
On the phone I see gmandyam, [Host], Paul_Kinlan, nwidell
20:05:41 [vandebo]
20:05:42 [Zakim]
[Host] has dsr, fjh, Josh_Soref, darobin, shan, lgombos, Milan, richt, kensaku, Cathy, jgiraud, aizu, dcheng3, youenn, jhawkins, Jungkee
20:05:52 [vandebo]
I can be if that would be more useful
20:06:12 [darobin]
it depends how much you want to talk :)
20:06:47 [vandebo]
The main gallery author (sorry, forget his name) has been focusing the Gallery proposal on the online case, and has suggested deferring the local media case to the sys apps group. This seems counter to the groups intent
20:07:23 [darobin]
vandebo, that's not an entirely correct characterisation
20:07:50 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: that's not true
20:07:51 [darobin]
vandebo, DAP's Gallery is both for local and online, but it is limited in a number of things (e.g. write-back)
20:08:08 [Josh_Soref]
... sys apps is focusing on local cases requiring local permissions and more underlying apis to the platform
20:08:16 [darobin]
vandebo, whereas what's in SysApps is far more advanced and complex, and has security implications beyond what is usually acceptable in a browser
20:08:31 [darobin]
vandebo, the same applies to contacts and a few other things
20:09:05 [Josh_Soref]
richt: sys apps is "throwing the kitchen sink at things"
20:09:09 [Josh_Soref]
... "let's give away the farm"
20:09:17 [fjh]
20:09:28 [Josh_Soref]
darobin: that's a decision for Sys Apps to make (after it forms )
20:09:51 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: we're defining a light-weight api for accessing things
20:09:56 [vandebo]
darobin: ok. I was under the the impression that what I said was accurate from the various list dicussions, but I'll admit that it's not entirely clear. It seems that's not the intention, so my question is moot.
20:10:45 [Josh_Soref]
dsr: this group is focusing on cases where the application you visit aren't trusted up front
20:11:01 [Josh_Soref]
richt: i know this is sys apps, and sys apps doesn't exist yet
20:11:10 [Josh_Soref]
... but if they want what they make to be available in browsers
20:11:14 [Josh_Soref]
... they'll have to tread carefully
20:11:15 [fjh]
s/we're defining a light-weight api for accessing things/the focus on DAP is for simple applications that can use remote or local resources, so these re relevant to DAP. Sysapps will have more detail for trusted environments and may do similar work, but this should not preclude DAP from doing its work/
20:11:32 [fjh]
discussion of what SysApps should do should not be the discussion of the DAP WG.
20:11:45 [Josh_Soref]
dsr: we have two charters
20:11:55 [Josh_Soref]
... for sys apps, we did a poll to find out what people are willing to implement
20:11:59 [Josh_Soref]
... what they're willing to edit
20:12:05 [Josh_Soref]
... what they're willing to write test cases for
20:12:13 [Josh_Soref]
... the charter is split into two phases
20:12:24 [Josh_Soref]
... the first phase is primarily working on Security Model and some test apis
20:12:28 [Josh_Soref]
... that aren't controversial
20:12:47 [Josh_Soref]
... and then there was a problem that the list of apis was too long for a group to work on in its allocated time
20:13:00 [Josh_Soref]
... if the group is successful, it could then take in more items (rechartering)
20:13:20 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm now waiting for W3C Management (W3M) to approve the charter to enter W3 Review
20:13:43 [richt]
ScribeNick: richt
20:13:45 [dsr]
20:13:59 [dsr]
20:14:02 [richt]
fjh: So we have a charter and chairs listed.
20:14:05 [Zakim]
+ +1.510.393.aadd
20:14:36 [vandebo]
that's me, sorry I don't know the protocol
20:14:47 [richt]
Zakim, aadd is vandebo
20:14:47 [Zakim]
+vandebo; got it
20:15:21 [richt]
dsr: next step is for the charter to be approved.
20:16:21 [richt]
dsr: the mission statement for sys apps has been 'wobbly'.
20:16:34 [richt]
dsr: is going to get darobin or fjh to help with that.
20:17:00 [richt]
fjh: send it over to us and we'll take a look at it
20:18:12 [richt]
s/over to us and we'll take/over to darobin and I and we'll take/
20:18:28 [richt]
dsr: hope to get AC approval to start Sys Apps starting next week.
20:18:44 [richt]
jhawkins: so what is the overlap between DAP and Sys Apps?
20:18:50 [richt]
darobin: the primary overlap is around data formats.
20:19:29 [guest]
guest has joined #dap
20:19:30 [richt]
darobin: Presumably Sys Apps will have a 'deeper' API that a similar DAP API but presumably it will use the same format.
20:19:44 [richt]
s/'deeper' API that/'deeper' API than/
20:20:03 [richt]
jhawkins: It sounds like who you're targetting for implementation is the difference
20:20:06 [richt]
fjh: correct
20:20:15 [richt]
20:20:44 [richt]
fjh: we don't need to deep dive now. The Sys Apps working group will need to tackle these issues early on.
20:21:01 [gmandyam]
20:21:06 [richt]
fjh: In theory the DAP API should be used wherever possible...depending on the requirements,
20:22:10 [richt]
darobin: there is likely to be enough of an overlap in membership so that coordination between Sys Apps and DAP will not be a problem.
20:22:26 [richt]
darobin: a lot of the people in this room are likely to also be involved in Sys Apps.
20:23:08 [richt]
...would be useful if, at the beginning of Sys Apps, someone retrace the history of DAP so they don't make the same mistakes.
20:23:25 [Josh_Soref]
20:23:26 [richt]
Topic: NFC
20:23:42 [richt]
dsr: At a similar point to Sys Apps. Still looking for the chairs for that group.
20:23:55 [richt]
dsr: believe we can go to AC review without having chairs in place.
20:24:34 [richt]
Proposed NFC charter:
20:24:49 [gmandyam]
Should I just post my question on IRC, or should I ask Dave directly?
20:25:51 [Zakim]
20:26:14 [fjh]
ack fjh
20:26:20 [fjh]
ack gmandyam
20:26:43 [richt]
gmandyam: Would like a little more detail on Phase 1/2 in Sys Apps.
20:26:55 [fjh]
group discussed potential collaboration/overlap with Sys Apps
20:27:09 [fjh]
Heads up on progression of charters and AC review plans for these potential WGs
20:27:24 [richt]
gmandyam: PhoneGap specifically refer to existing APIs. Are you planning to follow that so there's no unnecessary replication of APIs?
20:27:35 [richt]
dsr: can't speak for the group directly since it hasn't formed yet.
20:27:43 [Zakim]
20:27:53 [richt]
...the general feeling at the moment though seems to be where APIs are 'good enough' already they will be used.
20:29:30 [richt]
gmandyam: what is difficult at this point is that multiple APIs already exist and it's going to be difficult to work around that.
20:29:44 [richt]
dsr: those discussion are still to take place since the group hasn't been formed yet.
20:29:48 [richt]
gmandyam: ok, thanks.
20:30:12 [richt]
Topic: Interop and Testing
20:30:59 [Zakim]
20:31:33 [richt]
darobin: several things we can talk about here.
20:31:46 [darobin]
20:31:46 [richt]
darobin: specifically want to bring up two things.
20:32:08 [richt]
darobin: 1. The tutorial for using testharness.js (link provided above by darobin)
20:34:17 [richt]
...we are getting a lot of input tests that are using the framework slightly wrong
20:34:23 [richt] hopefully this will help people.
20:34:28 [darobin]
20:34:40 [richt]
2. W3C Test Framework
20:34:53 [richt]
s/2. W3C Test Framework/...2. W3C Test Framework/
20:35:07 [richt]
...lists all the test suites that the tool knows about.
20:35:29 [richt]
...allows you to import a test suite from a manifest file (manifests can be generated from a small tool).
20:35:59 [richt]
...anyone on the web can then run a test suite directly from this framework.
20:36:28 [richt]
...makes it possible for the web site to gather test results in a distributed way from users.
20:37:25 [richt] the idea is to group everything, gather lots of data and analyse subtle differences in implementations.
20:39:18 [darobin]
20:39:39 [fjh]
q+ to ask if test app suite requires writing spec in particular manner
20:40:10 [darobin]
20:40:29 [richt]
...Test Framework API also available (link on line above by darobin)
20:40:47 [richt] you can hook in to the tool from your own code/systems
20:40:58 [richt]
20:40:59 [richt]
ack fjh
20:40:59 [Zakim]
fjh, you wanted to ask if test app suite requires writing spec in particular manner
20:41:15 [richt]
fjh: is this stuff seperate from the work that Dom and Marcos did on how to markup tests.
20:41:43 [richt]
Marcos and Doms test methodology spec:
20:42:02 [dsr]
q+ to note that there seems to be some bugs in how results are reported on some platforms
20:42:12 [richt]
darobin: what we don't have yet is consensus on a single way to markup a spec with test assertions.
20:42:54 [richt]
...there are two testing groups in W3C
20:42:58 [fjh]
ack fjh
20:42:58 [darobin]
20:43:12 [richt]
...I encourage you to join both of these groups
20:43:54 [darobin]
20:43:57 [fjh]
this wg is creating driver for automating browser testing, screen testing etc
20:44:06 [fjh]
s/this wg/rberjon: this wg/
20:44:29 [lgombos__]
lgombos__ has joined #dap
20:44:34 [fjh]
interest group looking at overall W3C testing infrastructure, including test framework etc
20:44:44 [fjh]
s/interest group/rberjon: interest group/
20:44:48 [richt]
s/rberjon: this wg/darobin: this wg
20:44:51 [darobin]
20:44:53 [richt]
s/rberjon: this wg/darobin: this wg/
20:45:20 [richt]
dsr: when do these groups expire?
20:45:24 [richt]
darobin: end of 2013.
20:45:34 [richt]
...for Web Testing Interest Group.
20:45:38 [fjh]
ack dsr
20:45:38 [Zakim]
dsr, you wanted to note that there seems to be some bugs in how results are reported on some platforms
20:45:56 [richt]
dsr: Playing around with Vibration test suite yesterday. A couple of minor things came up.
20:47:20 [richt]
...the way it reports the platform is a bit strange.
20:47:28 [richt]
darobin: it gets it from the platform so nothing we can do.
20:47:40 [richt]
dsr: I was expecting the device to vibrate on some tests.
20:47:43 [richt] didn't.
20:47:50 [richt]
darobin: that seems like it might be a failure.
20:47:58 [fjh]
q+ to ask where to look for status of battery, vibration testing
20:48:02 [richt]
dsr: it was marked as passed.
20:48:06 [richt]
darobin: will look in to it.
20:48:10 [fjh]
ack fjh
20:48:10 [Zakim]
fjh, you wanted to ask where to look for status of battery, vibration testing
20:50:39 [richt]
dsr: We're publishing test results without the UA vendors permission. Any problems with that?
20:50:46 [richt]
darobin: we don't have any problem with that.
20:50:54 [richt]
fjh: this is all generated from public information
20:51:21 [richt]
Josh_Soref: IE in pre-release says that you are not authorized to post write-ups or reports on those products.
20:51:31 [fjh]
q+ to mention existing practice
20:51:39 [richt]
...that's not really a bad thing for a company providing a beta product.
20:52:01 [richt]
...they have occasionally gone after people for going against these T&Cs.
20:52:34 [richt]
darobin: Future W3C Test Framework feature: If you have data you don't want to include then you don't include it
20:53:09 [richt]
fjh: Anonymizing/aggregrating the data is a way to avoid these issues.
20:53:32 [fjh]
20:53:38 [fjh]
ack fjh
20:53:38 [Zakim]
fjh, you wanted to mention existing practice
20:53:40 [richt]
darobin: in practice this shouldn't be an issue since we don't generally have access to internal builds.
20:54:18 [richt]
Josh_Soref: Where do bug reports go for the W3C Test Framework?
20:55:16 [darobin]
20:55:18 [darobin]
20:56:38 [Josh_Soref]
20:56:38 [Josh_Soref]
20:56:53 [Josh_Soref]
20:56:57 [richt]
here's a short link to the W3C Test Framework Bugzilla URL:
20:57:36 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:57:36 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
20:58:29 [richt]
darobin: Any more q's on testing/interop?
20:58:46 [richt]
jhawkins: still need help with testing for web intents
20:58:53 [richt]
fjh: maybe we can talk about that tomorrow.
20:59:13 [richt]
[fjh goes through the proposed agenda for tomorrow]
20:59:42 [richt]
fjh: Not sure how much we'll have on Thursday but we'll have to see.
21:00:11 [richt]
fjh: tomorrow's agenda is: UPnP/Discovery, Web Intents, [lunch], ...Web Intents, Network Information API.
21:00:36 [richt]
fjh: Plan to start at 9:30 tomorrow morning.
21:01:47 [richt]
s/Web Intents, [lunch]/Web Intents (testing), [lunch]/
21:02:26 [richt]
fjh: Any concerns about the agenda tomorrow?
21:02:36 [fjh]
Other topics to follow will be media capture review, network information, sensors
21:02:40 [richt]
Will be doing a UPnP demo during the UPnP session.
21:02:51 [richt]
s/Will be doing a UPnP demo during the UPnP session./fjh: Will be doing a UPnP demo during the UPnP session./
21:03:18 [richt]
fjh: We have a dinner at 6pm tonight.
21:03:31 [richt] Border Cafe, Middlesex Tpk.
21:05:36 [richt]
fjh: meeting is in recess.
21:05:55 [richt]
trackbot, end meeting
21:05:55 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
21:05:55 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been +1.858.651.aaaa, +, nwidell, +358.718.00aacc, Paul_Kinlan, dsr, fjh, Josh_Soref, darobin, shan, lgombos, Milan, richt,
21:05:58 [Zakim]
... kensaku, Cathy, jgiraud, aizu, dcheng3, youenn, jhawkins, gmandyam, Jungkee, +1.510.393.aadd, vandebo
21:06:03 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
21:06:03 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot