13:00:11 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #coremob
13:00:11 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/08/01-coremob-irc
13:00:51 <Jo> happy for you to Josh. if you would be so kind
13:00:54 <bryan> oresent+ Bryan_Sullivan
13:01:01 <bryan> present+ Bryan_Sullivan
13:01:05 <Josh_Soref> s/oresent/present/
13:01:10 <Josh_Soref> trackbot, start meeting
13:01:13 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs 25
13:01:13 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #coremob
13:01:15 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 
13:01:15 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
13:01:16 <trackbot> Meeting: Core Mobile Web Platform Community Group Teleconference
13:01:16 <trackbot> Date: 01 August 2012
13:01:23 <Josh_Soref> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:01:29 <bryan> present+ Bryan_Sullivan
13:01:29 <Josh_Soref> RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:01:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/01-coremob-minutes.html Josh_Soref
13:01:47 <Josh_Soref> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:01:47 <Jo> present+ Jo, Josh_Soref, Andrew_Betts
13:01:49 <Josh_Soref> RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:01:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/01-coremob-minutes.html Josh_Soref
13:02:01 <Josh_Soref> Scribe: Jo 
13:02:07 <Josh_Soref> s/Jo/Josh_Soref/
13:02:10 <Josh_Soref> RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:02:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/01-coremob-minutes.html Josh_Soref
13:02:56 <Josh_Soref> ScribeNick: Josh_Soref
13:02:59 <Josh_Soref> RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:02:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/01-coremob-minutes.html Josh_Soref
13:03:09 <jfmoy> jfmoy has joined #coremob
13:03:14 <Dan> Dan has joined #coremob
13:03:19 <Josh_Soref> s/happy for you to Josh. if you would be so kind//
13:03:25 <Josh_Soref> RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:03:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/01-coremob-minutes.html Josh_Soref
13:04:03 <Josh_Soref> s/ScribeNick: Josh_Soref//
13:04:06 <Jo> Josh_Soref - yes
13:04:33 <Josh_Soref> Chair: Jo Rabin, Robin Berjon
13:04:36 <Josh_Soref> RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:04:36 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/01-coremob-minutes.html Josh_Soref
13:04:51 <Josh_Soref> s/Josh_Soref - yes//
13:05:09 <Jo> Regrets: Aaron_Randall, Chaals, Kenneth_Auchenberg
13:05:22 <Jo> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-coremob/2012Jul/0056.html
13:05:44 <Josh_Soref> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-coremob/2012Jul/0056.html
13:06:02 <Josh_Soref> Jo: present, Jo, darobin, Josh_Soref, andrew_betts 
13:06:05 <Josh_Soref> ... jfmoy 
13:06:07 <Josh_Soref> ... bryan 
13:06:16 <Josh_Soref> ... tobie 
13:06:49 <Josh_Soref> kai: Kai Fritz, vodafone
13:07:28 <jfmoy_> jfmoy_ has joined #coremob
13:07:34 <Josh_Soref> jo: who else?
13:07:39 <Josh_Soref> ... is the w3c contact?
13:07:43 <Josh_Soref> darobin: probably not
13:07:52 <Josh_Soref> [ Chairs negotiate ]
13:08:16 <Josh_Soref> i/Agenda:/Topic: Attendance/
13:08:22 <Josh_Soref> Topic: Review F2F
13:08:26 <Jo> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-coremob/2012Jul/0055.html
13:09:00 <Josh_Soref> Jo: the summary took 2 days to produce, which is rather long for me
13:09:09 <chaals> chaals has joined #coremob
13:09:13 <Josh_Soref> ... i'd like people to make sure the resolutions were recorded correctly
13:09:20 <Josh_Soref> ... particularly the after lunch resolutions on day 2
13:09:26 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Adopt the draft minutes from this meeting with the amendment that the meeting took place on 25 and 26 June not 28 and 29 June as stated
13:09:37 <Josh_Soref> darobin: sounds good
13:09:48 <Jo> RESOLUTION: Adopt the draft minutes from this meeting with the amendment that the meeting took place on 25 and 26 June not 28 and 29 June as stated
13:10:10 <Josh_Soref> s/RESOLUTION: Adopt the draft minutes from this meeting with the amendment that the meeting took place on 25 and 26 June not 28 and 29 June as stated//
13:10:20 <Josh_Soref> tobie: ian jacobs asked for an executive summary
13:10:34 <Josh_Soref> ... it would be useful for w3, for us internally, and maybe for the w3c blog
13:10:39 <Josh_Soref> Jo: sounds reasonable
13:10:44 <Josh_Soref> ... since it is rather lengthy
13:10:46 <Josh_Soref> RESOLUTION: Adopt the draft minutes from this meeting with the amendment that the meeting took place on 25 and 26 June not 28 and 29 June as stated
13:10:47 <chaals> zakim, code?
13:10:47 <Zakim> sorry, chaals, I don't know what conference this is
13:10:50 <Jo> ACTION: Rabin to summarise the summary and post on CG blof
13:10:50 <trackbot> Created ACTION-46 - Summarise the summary and post on CG blof [on Jo Rabin - due 2012-08-08].
13:12:34 <Jo> > http://coremob.github.com/level-1/index.html Current Draft Level 1
13:13:08 <Josh_Soref> Topic: Level 1
13:13:17 <Josh_Soref> tobie: i'm going through the updates on the spec
13:13:27 <Josh_Soref> ... i've gone through most if not all of the actions specific to it
13:13:33 <Josh_Soref> ... there's a couple i have not done yet
13:13:46 <Josh_Soref> ... mostly because i have further questions about them
13:13:48 <Josh_Soref> ... or a bit of work to do
13:13:54 <Josh_Soref> ... but mostly i've closed the related actions
13:14:01 <Josh_Soref> Jo: we'll step through your actions
13:14:08 <Josh_Soref> ... i've moved your actions to pending-review
13:14:17 <Josh_Soref> ... anything you'd like to raise?
13:14:21 <Josh_Soref> tobie: not really
13:14:31 <Josh_Soref> ... i need to do some research before bringing them back to the group
13:14:39 <Josh_Soref> ... i don't want to bother the group before
13:14:47 <Josh_Soref> Jo: anything else on level 1 current draft?
13:14:49 <Josh_Soref> [ no ]
13:14:53 <Josh_Soref> Jo: thanks tobie 
13:15:06 <Josh_Soref> Topic: Discussion of offer by AT&T to edit Level 0 Spec
13:15:16 <Jo> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-coremob/2012Jul/0031.html
13:15:16 <Josh_Soref> Jo: AT&T offered 
13:15:26 <Josh_Soref> ... to redraft level 0
13:15:29 <darobin> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-coremob/2012Jul/0038.html
13:15:55 <Josh_Soref> ... my action-2 was to propose something different about level 0
13:16:06 <Josh_Soref> ... a way that would allow it to proceed in some orderly form
13:16:37 <Josh_Soref> ... we baselined features based on Matt Kelly's list
13:16:48 <Josh_Soref> ... there's also a discussion based on Mobile Web Best Practices
13:17:29 <Jo> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-coremob/2012Jul/0043.html
13:17:45 <Josh_Soref> ... here's my action-2 + action-4
13:17:51 <Josh_Soref> ... i've joined those two things together
13:17:59 <Josh_Soref> ... i'm proposing reconsidering what level 0 is
13:18:10 <Josh_Soref> ... to focus on a small set of UCs from Matt Kelly's defintions
13:18:20 <Josh_Soref> s/defintions/definitions
13:18:42 <Josh_Soref> ... i wonder if anyone has any views?
13:18:43 <Josh_Soref> q+
13:18:43 <bryan> q+
13:18:58 <Jo> ack bry
13:19:09 <Josh_Soref> bryan: i sent to the list our intent here
13:19:18 <tobie> q+
13:19:50 <Josh_Soref> ... we're ok with creating a document based on a wide range of devices/browsers
13:19:55 <Josh_Soref> ... or a defined set of features
13:20:01 <Josh_Soref> s/or/for/
13:20:07 <Josh_Soref> ... or taking a UC based approach
13:20:14 <Josh_Soref> ... analyze the features
13:20:23 <Josh_Soref> ... i think the UC based approach is interesting
13:20:35 <Josh_Soref> ... but i think people need information about what's available in browsers
13:20:48 <Josh_Soref> Jo: isn't that exactly what derailed progress on Level 0 initially?
13:21:00 <Josh_Soref> ... i'd rather not capture the initial state
13:21:11 <Josh_Soref> ... but capture definitional
13:21:19 <Jo> q?
13:21:22 <Josh_Soref> ... the group has reached a point where we can say Level 0 is aspirational
13:21:23 <Jo> ack Josh
13:21:48 <darobin> Josh_Soref: I think that we've reached a point where calling Level Zero is going to be a third rail
13:22:04 <darobin> ... so if someone wants to draft something they shouldn't mention level or zero
13:22:19 <darobin> ... there are sites that list features and support on browsers
13:22:30 <darobin> ... and don't do compliance, but some sites do things like it
13:22:48 <darobin> ... while we don't have test suites that do compliance, we should defer to other sites (e.g. caniuse.com)
13:22:56 <bryan> public sites e.g. caniuse provide support info inconsistently and incompletely
13:22:59 <darobin> ... it doesn't seem like a very good use of resources for us here to do that
13:23:20 <darobin> ... and I'm okay with something aspirational or definitional, but it should be somewhat narrow
13:23:32 <darobin> ... working from Matt Kelly's list isn't unreasonable
13:23:38 <darobin> ... but it should be limited in scope
13:23:43 <bryan> I do support the strategic focus either on verification or aspiration
13:23:44 <Jo> q?
13:23:47 <bryan> q+
13:23:47 <darobin> ... and use meaningful names in its title
13:23:47 <Jo> ack t
13:24:01 <Josh_Soref> tobie: one of the mistakes we made when we announced level things
13:24:08 <Josh_Soref> ... was not to consider the audience of these documents
13:24:13 <Josh_Soref> ... we got feedback from the implementers
13:24:16 <Josh_Soref> ... who are the audience
13:24:20 <bryan> but we need to be clear which we are trying to achieve
13:24:25 <chaals> [seems that it would make more sense to spend effort providing information so caniuse.com or whatever you like most is more accurate and complete. It's the same work that would be required anyway]
13:24:29 <Josh_Soref> ... was that they are *REALLY* not interested in documenting things we're moving away from
13:24:36 <Josh_Soref> ... but would rather document things we're moving towards
13:24:45 <Josh_Soref> ... this is something to keep in mind when talking about level 0
13:24:53 <Josh_Soref> ... the main target is developers
13:25:01 <Josh_Soref> s/the/if the/
13:25:05 <bryan> Tobie, what does "moving away from" mean?
13:25:06 <Jo> ack b
13:25:15 <Josh_Soref> ... then produce a document like that which would make implementers less cringy
13:25:26 <Josh_Soref> bryan: what did you mean by "moving away from"
13:25:41 <Josh_Soref> tobie: a document containing "EcmaScript 3"
13:25:49 <Josh_Soref> ... where implementers are moving to EcmaScript 5
13:25:57 <Josh_Soref> ... implementers are moving from HTML4 to HTML5
13:26:07 <Jo> q+
13:26:10 <Josh_Soref> ... that's the crux around documenting anything around the main market of mobile devices
13:26:18 <Josh_Soref> bryan: i think i understand what you said
13:26:21 <Josh_Soref> ... i'm not sure i get it
13:26:27 <darobin> q?
13:26:28 <Josh_Soref> ... as i dropped on irc
13:26:38 <Josh_Soref> ... i think the group needs to decide if it's going to document what's supported
13:26:50 <Josh_Soref> ... or to establish aspirations 
13:27:04 <Josh_Soref> ... if you're looking at aspirations, you can look at what's around the corner
13:27:11 <Josh_Soref> ... i don't think caniuse.com/browser scope
13:27:16 <Josh_Soref> ... is complete or consistent
13:27:25 <Josh_Soref> ... the methodology is extremely fragmented
13:27:32 <Josh_Soref> ... it's extremely difficult to use as a developer
13:27:46 <tobie> q+
13:27:50 <Jo> ack me
13:27:52 <Josh_Soref> ... one of our main focuses is to draw that together into a place that's automated, easy to consume
13:28:35 <Josh_Soref> Jo: i don't think it's this group's job to repeat what's done by browserscope/caniuse
13:28:45 <Josh_Soref> ... i'd like us to agree to move on if that's a consensus view
13:28:46 <jfmoy> q+
13:29:08 <Josh_Soref> ... it seems the group has proven by a non-existence proof
13:29:13 <Josh_Soref> ... that the baseline doesn't exist
13:29:28 <Josh_Soref> ... and to move to an aspirational thing
13:29:52 <Jo> q?
13:29:52 <Josh_Soref> ... defining "if it has this, this and this" then it is a mobile application [host?]
13:29:58 <Jo> ACK T
13:30:16 <Josh_Soref> tobie: if we're interested in giving a good picture of the world today
13:30:29 <Josh_Soref> ... this could be done by publishing the results of how well existing browsers fair on the level 1 spec
13:30:34 <bryan> agree, we are not trying to replace caniuse etc, but trying to promote consistency or agreement on what should be consistent
13:30:44 <darobin> q+
13:30:46 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: This group does not intend to reproduce the results of Browserscope or CanIUse
13:30:46 <Josh_Soref> ... if we have a good test suite, then the current state
13:30:55 <Jo> ack j
13:31:26 <Josh_Soref> ... of browsers is whatever percentile you're interested in
13:31:33 <Josh_Soref> ... say 90% of the browsers get as results
13:31:41 <bryan> how do developers fill the gaps then?
13:31:45 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION 2: There is no test suite below Level 1
13:31:52 <bryan> above the 85-90%
13:32:00 <Josh_Soref> jfmoy: i agree with bryan 
13:32:02 <Josh_Soref> ... on these concerns
13:32:12 <Josh_Soref> ... i'm surprised with discussions on caniuse / similar tools
13:32:19 <Josh_Soref> ... the results they provide is far from being
13:32:26 <Josh_Soref> ... i don't have a good level of trust in them
13:32:52 <Josh_Soref> ... we found discrepancies when comparing with our own internal testing
13:32:56 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION 3: Level 0 (if it exists at all) exists as a definition only what it means to be a mobile web app
13:33:04 <Jo> q?
13:33:08 <Jo> ack d
13:33:17 <Josh_Soref> darobin: as a data point
13:33:17 <darobin> http://w3c-test.org/framework/app/report/matrix-maker
13:33:33 <Josh_Soref> ... matrix maker is being built
13:33:41 <Josh_Soref> ... so you could pick browsers, specifications
13:33:51 <Josh_Soref> ... to give you a matrix of support for various browsers/specifications
13:33:59 <Josh_Soref> ... and you'll be able to save that report
13:34:06 <Josh_Soref> ... it ought to be available by the end of the month
13:34:24 <bryan> that will be useful, and CoreMob could then based upon that data issue some statement as to the baseline
13:34:25 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: This group does not intend to reproduce the results of Browserscope or CanIUse
13:34:48 <bryan> +1
13:34:51 <darobin> +1
13:35:05 <jfmoy> +1
13:35:17 <Josh_Soref> XX: i'm blocked from irc
13:35:27 <Josh_Soref> Jo: have you tried http://irc.w3.org/ ?
13:35:30 <dan> dan has joined #coremob
13:35:44 <jfmoy> s/XX/dan
13:35:59 <Josh_Soref> present+ Dan_Sun
13:36:00 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION 2: There is no test suite below Level 1
13:36:08 <Josh_Soref> RESOLUTION: This group does not intend to reproduce the results of Browserscope or CanIUse
13:36:16 <bryan> but based upon some testing somewhere, will the group establish what t thinks *is* the current state of the "Core Mobile Web" support?
13:36:55 <Josh_Soref> Jo: bryan, no, i don't think it will do that
13:37:03 <Josh_Soref> ... it might define what it means to be a mobile web application
13:37:13 <Josh_Soref> bryan: and explain why/when it matters
13:37:26 <Josh_Soref> Jo: i think defining the difference between a mobile web site and a mobile web application
13:37:39 <Josh_Soref> bryan: defining the state/aspiration
13:37:49 <Jo> q?
13:37:49 <Josh_Soref> ... the output needs to be something that is useful for developers
13:38:01 <Josh_Soref> ... if things aren't supported, but are filled through libraries
13:38:08 <Josh_Soref> ... that has a place in the landscape
13:38:32 <Josh_Soref> Jo: i think that could be discussed on list
13:38:42 <Josh_Soref> bryan: i think that should be noted
13:39:04 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION 2: This group will not produce a test suite that is below the aspirational Level 1
13:39:05 <dan> q?
13:39:18 <bryan> how polyfills play a role in current levels of support across browsers, and that they are a fact of the "mobile web" experience for developers
13:39:34 <Josh_Soref> dan: for level 0, if we only have documentation
13:39:45 <Josh_Soref> ... are we recommending developers use browserscope/caniuse?
13:40:01 <Josh_Soref> Jo: we're saying we want to complete a range of features across a range of browsers
13:40:08 <Josh_Soref> ... the point of the group is to look forwards
13:40:17 <Josh_Soref> ... maybe slightly in the future being december
13:40:41 <Josh_Soref> ... any test suite that would cover level 1 will cover the features that are important today
13:41:03 <bryan> I think one can only look forward and make sense of what is seen, by knowing the current point from which the observation is made, e.g. is the camera ahead or behind us?
13:41:10 <Josh_Soref> ... aside from a discussion of what is in a level 0 test suite
13:41:24 <Josh_Soref> dan: will we include all the specific features from level 0 into level 1?
13:41:33 <Josh_Soref> Jo: i'm not sure how one would do a test suite of HTTP
13:41:55 <Josh_Soref> tobie: i've already folded all the non-controversial parts of level 0 into level 1
13:42:08 <Josh_Soref> ... i did that before the f2f
13:42:19 <bryan> Folding level 0 into level 1 is I think a good compromise approach, if we want only to look forwrd
13:42:23 <Josh_Soref> dan: what do you mean by the controversial stuff
13:42:36 <bryan> appcache etc?
13:42:45 <Josh_Soref> tobie: there were a number of features included in the early draft of level 0
13:42:50 <Josh_Soref> ... some accidentally
13:42:55 <Josh_Soref> ... which made a lot of people very unhappy
13:43:04 <Josh_Soref> ... these included things that were encumbered by patents
13:43:16 <Josh_Soref> ... and vendor prefixed css features
13:43:30 <Josh_Soref> dan: for prefixed features
13:43:42 <Josh_Soref> ... i thought we agreed to test nonprefixed
13:43:45 <Josh_Soref> jo: we're going off topic
13:43:57 <Josh_Soref> ... we agreed at the F2F to only focus on spec'd features
13:43:59 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION 2: This group will not produce a test suite that is below the aspirational Level 1
13:44:03 <Josh_Soref> ... i'd like to return to the conversation
13:44:07 <tobie> +1
13:44:09 <darobin> +1
13:44:14 <Josh_Soref> Josh_Soref: +1
13:44:26 <Josh_Soref> RESOLUTION: This group will not produce a test suite that is below the aspirational Level 1
13:44:28 <bryan> +1 given that level 1 is as described by Tobie
13:44:44 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION 3: Level 0 (if it exists at all) exists as a definition only what it means to be a mobile web app
13:45:06 <tobie> bryan: http://coremob.github.com/level-1/index.html
13:46:00 <Josh_Soref> Jo: we define a mobile application
13:46:19 <Jo> q?
13:46:27 <bryan> thanks, I will review the current level 1 spec
13:46:42 <Josh_Soref> ... as something which has a degree of autonomy
13:46:53 <Josh_Soref> ... and doesn't require online access for extended periods in order to do whatever it does
13:47:17 <Josh_Soref> ... whatever came out of it would be a minimal spec
13:47:26 <Josh_Soref> ... http capable, bootstrap from the web
13:48:01 <Josh_Soref> Jo: is it meaningful to call that level 0?
13:48:03 <bryan> I think it's a useful definition
13:48:16 <Josh_Soref> dan: i think that's too minimal
13:48:29 <Josh_Soref> Jo: what i'm proposing is that we review the list of features that matt kelly came up with
13:48:37 <tobie> q+
13:48:40 <Josh_Soref> ... if it can do this, you can't call it a mobile web app
13:48:43 <Jo> ack t
13:49:20 <Josh_Soref> q+ to suggest there's some confusion between an App and an App Host
13:49:29 <Josh_Soref> tobie: there's been a notion of dropping leveling
13:49:30 <chaals> for everyone else) than deciding a priori whether there is something people might accept and value]
13:49:38 <Josh_Soref> ... since we don't have a level 0, and don't have a notion of a level 2
13:49:51 <Josh_Soref> ... let's release level 1 as "Core Mob ..." or "Mobile ..."
13:50:12 <Josh_Soref> ... and then see if we want to do things as yearly snapshots
13:50:13 <chaals> i/for everyone/[WHy not let Bryan have a go and see if he writes something that convinces us? It might be quicker
13:50:14 <Josh_Soref> ... or levels
13:50:28 <bryan> I would like to see some results from whatever testing is done, either in the Testing IG or elsewhere, factored into the discussion on defining "what a mobile web app is" as what is supported clearly limits what an app "can be"
13:50:34 <Josh_Soref> ... maybe later have a modern web app definition
13:51:14 <Josh_Soref> ... have something distinct from level 1
13:51:16 <Josh_Soref> Josh_Soref: +1
13:51:19 <Josh_Soref> dan: i agree
13:51:26 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION:Rename proposed definition doc as "What is a Web App" drop the whole idea of Level 0 and rename Level 1 as ScoreMob 2012
13:51:52 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION:Rename proposed definition doc as "What is a Web App" drop the whole idea of Level 0 and rename Level 1 as CoreMob 2012
13:52:11 <darobin> +1
13:52:15 <dan> +1
13:52:21 <Josh_Soref> Jo: any objections to dropping level 0?
13:52:22 <bryan> +1 (sorry, don't want to belabor a difficult discussion, the group should move on)
13:52:28 <Josh_Soref> Josh_Soref: +1 from me for dropping it
13:53:07 <Josh_Soref> RESOLUTION: Rename proposed definition doc as "What is a Web App" drop the whole idea of Level 0 and rename Level 1 as CoreMob 2012
13:53:48 <Josh_Soref> Jo: is there support for doing a small definitional document on what is a web app?
13:53:56 <Josh_Soref> ... bryan, would you volunteer to do it?
13:54:08 <Josh_Soref> ... you volunteered for something different
13:54:57 <bryan> we will have opportunity to do what is needed, once we have the data to do so - any document prior to that would be preliminary
13:55:54 <andrew_betts> +1 to the need for a clearer understanding of what a 'web app' is.
13:55:59 <darobin> ScribeNick: dan
13:56:02 <darobin> gah!
13:56:04 <darobin> ScribeNick: darobin
13:56:05 <Jo> ACTION: Sullivan to draft a chapter outline of "What is a Web App?"
13:56:05 <trackbot> Created ACTION-47 - Draft a chapter outline of "What is a Web App?" [on Bryan Sullivan - due 2012-08-08].
13:56:27 <Josh_Soref> s/gah!//
13:56:29 <darobin> jo: we won't have time to do action bashing
13:56:32 <darobin> Topic: AOB?
13:56:48 <darobin> jo: three things to discuss
13:56:58 <Josh_Soref> RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:56:58 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/01-coremob-minutes.html Josh_Soref
13:56:58 <darobin> ... 1) shall we have another call in 2 weeks' time?
13:57:13 <darobin> jfmoy: I would prefer a month
13:57:13 <darobin> +1
13:58:13 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Further meeting in 1 month 
13:58:26 <darobin> RESOLUTION: Further meeting in 1 month
13:58:39 <Jo> ACTION: Jo to arrange September call
13:58:40 <trackbot> Created ACTION-48 - Arrange September call [on Jo Rabin - due 2012-08-08].
13:58:40 <bryan> jo, please send me what you described as the basic characteristics of a "mobile web app", and we will flesh it out 
13:59:17 <darobin> jo: 2) noting the dates of the f2f are Oct 2-3, with logistics to follow, any further questions? I'll circulate details
13:59:20 <darobin> ... AOB?
13:59:36 <darobin> ... then let us thanks the FT
13:59:59 <Jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Coremob thanks the FT for hosting the voice channel for this call
14:00:07 <dan> +1
14:00:16 <darobin> RESOLUTION: Coremob thanks the FT for hosting the voice channel for this call
14:00:19 <darobin> [Adjourned]
14:00:30 <bryan> bryan has left #coremob
14:00:42 <Jo> rrsagent draft miniutes
14:01:11 <Jo> rrsagent: draft minutes
14:01:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/01-coremob-minutes.html Jo
14:02:31 <Jo> present+ dan_sun, Jean-francois_Moy
14:02:39 <Jo> present+ chaals
14:02:44 <Jo> regrets- chaals
14:03:27 <Jo> present+ Tobie_Langel
14:04:25 <Jo> rrsagent: draft minutes
14:04:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/01-coremob-minutes.html Jo
14:04:40 <Jo> s/member:rrsagent draft miniutes//
14:05:07 <Jo> s/rrsagent draft miniutes//
14:07:20 <Jo> present+ Kai Fritz
14:07:45 <Josh_Soref> s/Kai Fritz/Kai_Fritz/
14:12:50 <Jo> [Following the adjournment co-Chair realised that he'd been dreadfully rude in not thanking the Scribe]
14:13:09 <Jo> rrsagent: draft minutes
14:13:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/01-coremob-minutes.html Jo
14:17:18 <darobin> darobin has left #coremob
14:32:50 <Jo> regrets- Chaals
14:33:03 <Jo> member:rrsagent: draft minutes
14:34:02 <Jo> rrsagent: draft minutes
14:34:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/01-coremob-minutes.html Jo
15:12:29 <Josh_Soref> Zakim, bye
15:12:29 <Zakim> Zakim has left #coremob
15:12:34 <Josh_Soref> s/Zakim, bye//
15:30:27 <jfmoy> jfmoy has joined #coremob
16:40:30 <jet> jet has joined #coremob
17:20:18 <jfmoy> jfmoy has joined #coremob
18:38:08 <jet> jet has joined #coremob
18:44:03 <jet> jet has joined #coremob