IRC log of dap on 2013-01-09

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:46:15 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dap
14:46:15 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:46:17 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
14:46:17 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #dap
14:46:19 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be DAP
14:46:19 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see UW_DAP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 14 minutes
14:46:20 [trackbot]
Meeting: Device APIs Working Group Teleconference
14:46:20 [trackbot]
Date: 09 January 2013
14:46:37 [fjh]
14:46:56 [fjh]
fjh has changed the topic to: dap 3279 ; agenda
14:47:12 [fjh]
Chair: Frederick_Hirsch
14:47:21 [fjh]
Present+ Frederick_Hirsch
14:58:40 [Zakim]
UW_DAP()10:00AM has now started
14:58:47 [Zakim]
+ +1.289.261.aaaa
14:58:53 [bryan]
bryan has joined #dap
14:59:20 [Zakim]
14:59:21 [Zakim]
14:59:28 [fjh]
zakim, [IPcaller] is me
14:59:28 [Zakim]
+fjh; got it
14:59:35 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, aaaa is me
14:59:35 [Zakim]
+Josh_Soref; got it
14:59:53 [dtran]
dtran has joined #dap
15:00:02 [dtran]
Present+ Dzung_Tran
15:00:08 [fjh]
zakim, who is here>
15:00:09 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who is here>', fjh
15:00:15 [Zakim]
+ +1.781.534.aabb
15:00:20 [fjh]
s/zakim, who is here>//
15:00:24 [lgombos]
Zakim, aabb is me
15:00:24 [Zakim]
+lgombos; got it
15:00:28 [fjh]
zakim, who is here?
15:00:28 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Josh_Soref, Bryan_Sullivan, fjh, lgombos
15:00:29 [Zakim]
On IRC I see dtran, bryan, Zakim, RRSAgent, fjh, lgombos, hiroto_, richt, dom, mounir, tobie, slightlyoff_, trackbot, Josh_Soref
15:00:33 [lgombos]
Present+ Laszlo_Gombos
15:00:46 [Cathy]
Cathy has joined #dap
15:01:00 [Josh_Soref]
scribe: Josh_Soref
15:01:10 [Milan_Patel]
Milan_Patel has joined #dap
15:01:10 [dcheng3]
dcheng3 has joined #dap
15:01:21 [Zakim]
+ +25686aacc
15:01:36 [Milan_Patel]
Present+ Milan_Patel
15:02:05 [fjh]
Topic: Announcements
15:02:07 [Zakim]
+ +49.173.537.aadd
15:02:11 [Zakim]
15:02:15 [dcheng3]
Present+ Diana_Cheng
15:02:17 [Zakim]
15:02:18 [dom]
Zakim, ??P22 is me
15:02:18 [Zakim]
+dom; got it
15:02:20 [fjh]
Happy New Year all.
15:02:20 [fjh]
Welcome Sunghan -
15:02:30 [dcheng3]
zakim, aadd is dcheng3
15:02:30 [Zakim]
+dcheng3; got it
15:02:36 [fjh]
rrsagent, generate minutes
15:02:36 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate fjh
15:02:46 [AnssiK]
AnssiK has joined #dap
15:02:47 [fjh]
zakim, who is here?
15:02:47 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Josh_Soref, Bryan_Sullivan, fjh, lgombos, +25686aacc, dcheng3, Cathy, dom
15:02:49 [Zakim]
On IRC I see AnssiK, dcheng3, Milan_Patel, Cathy, dtran, bryan, Zakim, RRSAgent, fjh, lgombos, hiroto_, richt, dom, mounir, tobie, slightlyoff_, trackbot, Josh_Soref
15:02:56 [Zakim]
15:03:03 [AnssiK]
zakim, ??P25 is me
15:03:03 [Zakim]
+AnssiK; got it
15:03:14 [AnssiK]
Present+ Anssi_Kostiainen
15:03:23 [dom]
Zakim, aacc is Milan
15:03:23 [Zakim]
+Milan; got it
15:03:43 [dom]
Zakim, Milan is really Milan_Patel
15:03:44 [Zakim]
+Milan_Patel; got it
15:03:46 [Josh_Soref]
Zakim, mute me
15:03:47 [Zakim]
Josh_Soref should now be muted
15:03:55 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Minutes Approval
15:03:58 [fjh]
12 December 2012 -
15:04:23 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: Draft minutes from 12 December 2012 are approved.
15:04:30 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: HTML Media Capture
15:04:40 [fjh]
working draft published 13 December 2012:
15:04:49 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: ... with the change to the boolean
15:04:50 [fjh]
previous LC Draft Comments
15:05:02 [fjh]
await Doug Scheper's confirmation:
15:05:18 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: dom, when you see shepazu...
15:05:28 [Josh_Soref]
dom: i'll try to ping him, i should see him next week
15:05:37 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: i think we've done a good job, but i'd like his confirmation
15:05:55 [Josh_Soref]
... once that's done, i think we've addressed all the LC comments
15:06:02 [Josh_Soref]
... AnssiK did you want to say anything?
15:06:21 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: we got positive feedback from Facebook (tobie) and Mozilla (mounir)
15:06:28 [Josh_Soref]
... we should try to ping the Google guys
15:07:28 [fjh]
fjh: Anssi can you please send an email
15:07:32 [fjh]
Anssi: yes, I ca
15:07:41 [Josh_Soref]
15:07:42 [Josh_Soref]
15:07:43 [Josh_Soref]
15:07:53 [Josh_Soref]
s/scribe: Anssi/fjh: AnssiK
15:07:58 [fjh]
fjh: I think we are on the right track, given that the LC comments were resolved with our recent changes
15:07:58 [Josh_Soref]
15:08:06 [Josh_Soref]
15:08:12 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:08:12 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
15:08:16 [Josh_Soref]
topic: Ambient Light - LC
15:08:33 [fjh]
LC published 13 December 2012,
15:08:40 [fjh]
LC ends 26 January.
15:08:49 [fjh]
LC comments (3 specific + 1 general comment so far)
15:09:17 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: there's comments about default values
15:09:20 [Josh_Soref]
... i think AnssiK replied there
15:09:27 [Josh_Soref]
... there are specific comments from tabatkins
15:09:35 [AnssiK]
15:09:43 [Josh_Soref]
ack AnssiK
15:09:51 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: dougt is editing the spec
15:10:00 [Josh_Soref]
... i've asked if he'd like me to help him
15:11:40 [fjh]
action: anssiK to update Ambient Light specification for LC-2737 , bringing queueing order update from Proximity to Ambient Light
15:11:40 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-605 - Update Ambient Light specification for LC-2737 , bringing queueing order update from Proximity to Ambient Light [on Anssi Kostiainen - due 2013-01-16].
15:11:57 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: will you also deal w/ event-member?
15:12:05 [Josh_Soref]
... that seems to be a general comment
15:12:09 [fjh]
15:12:09 [Josh_Soref]
... for other specs too
15:12:17 [fjh]
general comment to Proximity and Ambient Light
15:12:33 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: that's part of this
15:12:37 [AnssiK]
15:12:39 [Josh_Soref]
... i'll cherrypick anne's comments
15:12:48 [Josh_Soref]
... from proximity and backport them into ambient light
15:13:07 [fjh]
action: anssik to update Proximity and Ambient Light to define events, per LC-2738
15:13:08 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-606 - Update Proximity and Ambient Light to define events, per LC-2738 [on Anssi Kostiainen - due 2013-01-16].
15:13:08 [Josh_Soref]
... that should be fairly straightforward
15:13:33 [Josh_Soref]
15:13:40 [trackbot]
trackbot has joined #dap
15:13:53 [Josh_Soref]
15:13:55 [fjh]
15:14:14 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: will you do this as well?
15:14:18 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: this will be handled
15:15:09 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: send me a pointer if there's anything else i haven't recorded
15:15:23 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: you've probably updated it already, but i'll double check
15:15:43 [fjh]
action: anssik to update Ambient Light per LC-2737, bringing any questions to the list
15:15:43 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-607 - Update Ambient Light per LC-2737, bringing any questions to the list [on Anssi Kostiainen - due 2013-01-16].
15:16:36 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: Proximity API - LC
15:16:39 [fjh]
LC published 6 December 2012. LC ends 24 January.
15:16:50 [fjh]
LC comments (2 specific comments , 1 general comment so far) :
15:17:21 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: that's already addressed
15:17:34 [fjh]
15:17:49 [AnssiK]
15:18:06 [fjh]
action: fjh to update LC-2731 as completed
15:18:07 [AnssiK]
specify the interface name in the definition of default values i.e. 'The XXX attribute of the YYY interface MUST […]':
15:18:07 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-608 - Update LC-2731 as completed [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2013-01-16].
15:18:16 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: so both of these are done?
15:18:20 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: yes, you can close them
15:18:30 [Josh_Soref]
... i'll need to update ambient accordingly, but for proximity, they're done
15:18:55 [Josh_Soref]
Topic: General LC comment (putting Ambient Light/Proximity into single document)
15:19:13 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: earlier, we had a generic sensor api
15:19:21 [Josh_Soref]
... i think the comments here are asking for something else
15:19:29 [Josh_Soref]
... i think rick is proposing
15:19:42 [AnssiK]
15:19:45 [Josh_Soref]
... is to have a spec for ambient/proximity as one spec
15:19:49 [Josh_Soref]
15:19:58 [Josh_Soref]
... but for a bunch of things that have the same api shape
15:20:08 [Josh_Soref]
... there's some positives and negatives to making such a change
15:20:24 [Josh_Soref]
... it's good to avoid duplication when you can
15:20:43 [Josh_Soref]
... advantage of splitting up is you can go forward on individual timelines
15:20:58 [fjh] (Anne)
15:20:58 [fjh] (detailed, Rick)
15:20:59 [fjh] - device namespace
15:20:59 [fjh]
15:20:59 [fjh]
editing offer: (Rick)
15:21:08 [Josh_Soref]
... it depends on what implementers think/want
15:22:00 [fjh]
fjh: previously we discussed a generic sensor API that was broad and extensible, I believe this proposal has narrower scope to those well-defined items that have common mechanism such as Ambient Light, Proximiity
15:22:09 [dtran]
originally we have many of these sensors in one spec; the group want to split them
15:22:27 [fjh]
fjh: in general agree it is good to avoid repetition of material, express common material once
15:22:42 [Josh_Soref]
15:22:43 [Josh_Soref]
15:22:43 [Josh_Soref]
15:22:45 [Josh_Soref]
15:22:52 [Josh_Soref]
15:22:53 [Josh_Soref]
15:22:55 [fjh]
fjh: however from process perspective advantages to having separate tracks
15:23:00 [Josh_Soref]
15:23:02 [Josh_Soref]
15:23:04 [Josh_Soref]
15:23:09 [fjh]
would like to avoid backtracking in process, e.g. back to FPWD etc
15:23:19 [Josh_Soref]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:23:19 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Josh_Soref
15:23:19 [fjh]
ack AnssiK
15:23:22 [Josh_Soref]
15:23:30 [Josh_Soref]
15:23:41 [Josh_Soref]
15:23:43 [Josh_Soref]
s/would/... would/
15:23:59 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: what anne said is it would be easier to review if the specs were merged together
15:24:04 [fjh]
anssiK notes two issues - how to organize specs versus different design
15:24:07 [Josh_Soref]
... and there was less boilerplate
15:24:16 [Josh_Soref]
... if other factors make things worse
15:24:24 [Josh_Soref]
15:24:29 [Josh_Soref]
15:24:55 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: maybe we should first deal w/ the issue of whether we have the right design
15:25:31 [Josh_Soref]
... i'd like to hear if there's a problem we need to address
15:25:42 [Josh_Soref]
ack me
15:26:49 [fjh]
josh_soref: one concern - if we have something with an API that is abstracted, what does it mean to have two implementations.
15:27:07 [fjh]
josh_soref: clear for proximity but not in generic case
15:27:30 [fjh]
... fantasi publishes annual compendiums of CSS specs, likewise for WHATWG specs
15:27:56 [fjh]
... compendium is spec that is implemented
15:27:58 [fjh]
15:28:22 [fjh]
josh_soref: still allows them to move forward
15:28:32 [hiroto]
hiroto has joined #dap
15:28:53 [fjh]
need to be clear what is authoritative
15:29:18 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: i could easily hack that in
15:29:30 [Josh_Soref]
... we could easily product such a document out of what we have today
15:29:40 [AnssiK]
q+ to Josh
15:29:40 [Josh_Soref]
ack fjh
15:29:46 [dom]
[that seems to be still orthogonal to fjh's question about design rather than packaging]
15:29:57 [dtran]
15:30:04 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: you were concerned about how do you know if you've implemented it
15:30:16 [Josh_Soref]
... if each thing is defined in the spec individually, then it's still line items
15:30:19 [dtran]
this was originally the package of all the sensors
15:30:37 [Josh_Soref]
... we define them together
15:30:49 [Josh_Soref]
... you're right, that otherwise it's untestable
15:30:53 [Josh_Soref]
... on your second point
15:30:56 [AnssiK]
15:31:00 [Josh_Soref]
... we could do that
15:31:04 [Josh_Soref]
... as a compendium
15:31:10 [Josh_Soref]
... as AnssiK says, a NOTE
15:31:13 [Josh_Soref]
... that might be a good solution
15:31:33 [dom]
15:31:46 [fjh]
ack dom
15:31:54 [Josh_Soref]
dom: before we worry about packaging
15:32:11 [Josh_Soref]
... there's a high level design question
15:32:25 [Josh_Soref]
... what rick was asking for is a change from what we have today
15:32:26 [Josh_Soref]
... Constructors
15:32:35 [Josh_Soref]
... how you access them, how they're exposed
15:32:44 [Josh_Soref]
... that's a fairly strong departure from what we've been doing
15:32:59 [fjh]
to be concrete, is this the correct design discussion reference,
15:33:04 [Josh_Soref]
... the main question before we worry about how we package them together
15:33:15 [Josh_Soref]
... is whether we should change the current, widely deployed, api
15:33:29 [Josh_Soref]
dom: yes, that link
15:33:52 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: there's a tension between what's implemented, and what could be better/not
15:33:57 [AnssiK]
15:33:57 [fjh]
zakim, who is here?
15:33:58 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Josh_Soref, Bryan_Sullivan, fjh, lgombos, Milan_Patel, dcheng3, Cathy, dom, AnssiK
15:33:58 [Zakim]
On IRC I see hiroto, trackbot, AnssiK, dcheng3, Milan_Patel, Cathy, dtran, bryan, Zakim, RRSAgent, fjh, lgombos, richt, dom, mounir, tobie, slightlyoff_, Josh_Soref
15:34:02 [fjh]
ack AnssiK
15:34:13 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: the current designs are implementer driven
15:34:15 [AnssiK]
we experimented with constructor in some early Battery Status API drafts, e.g.:
15:34:23 [Josh_Soref]
... we experimented with structured patterns
15:34:32 [Josh_Soref]
... and that was shot down based on implementers' feedback
15:34:33 [lgombos]
15:34:43 [Josh_Soref]
... it had something to do with making the api as simple as possible
15:34:59 [fjh]
question is whether there are essential use cases not addressed in current approach
15:35:07 [dom]
q+ to say we need to document our design and hopefully reply to the thread
15:35:07 [Josh_Soref]
... we've been there, done that, it didn't work with battery
15:35:21 [fjh]
ack lgombos
15:35:36 [Josh_Soref]
... it has something to do with defining default state
15:35:41 [Josh_Soref]
... how do you measure state changes
15:35:52 [Josh_Soref]
... if you have a constructor, you start monitoring state when you construct it
15:36:24 [Josh_Soref]
lgombos: there's a consistency
15:36:39 [Josh_Soref]
... if things are apis in a certain way, libraries can always provide that
15:36:48 [Josh_Soref]
... i think the issue is any functional change
15:37:32 [fjh]
s/there's a consistency/question of whether it is just consistency and syntactic sugar or whether there is a fundamental change, if just consistency a library could be built on top of what we have defined/
15:37:40 [fjh]
15:37:43 [fjh]
ack dom
15:37:43 [Zakim]
dom, you wanted to say we need to document our design and hopefully reply to the thread
15:37:57 [Josh_Soref]
dom: i don't have an answer on whether we should change this
15:38:16 [Josh_Soref]
... going to implementers and telling them we're getting input from developers
15:38:30 [Josh_Soref]
... that developers think the current approach is wrong/not easy to track
15:39:04 [fjh]
we need to make a clear decision with agreement from implementers
15:39:07 [Josh_Soref]
... XXX
15:39:16 [Josh_Soref]
... we should go back to the implementers/developers
15:39:47 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: we have 2 implementations
15:39:53 [Josh_Soref]
... afaik, we have no shipping implementations
15:39:55 [fjh]
s/XXX/we need to make an explanation of our current approach and well as a justification of why a change might be desired, so a decision can be made and agreed/
15:40:02 [Josh_Soref]
... you can probably build firefox with proximity on
15:40:10 [Josh_Soref]
... some webkit ports have implemented proximity
15:40:18 [naomi]
naomi has joined #dap
15:40:23 [Josh_Soref]
... from this perspective, it would be possible to change th design
15:40:27 [Josh_Soref]
s/th d/the d/
15:40:32 [Josh_Soref]
... without breaking the web
15:40:34 [Josh_Soref]
q+ Josh_Soref
15:40:47 [Josh_Soref]
... the other question is whether implementers will get upset
15:40:59 [Josh_Soref]
... what is the problem that the new design fixes that the old design doesn't
15:41:13 [Josh_Soref]
... default-state is solved by constructor
15:41:13 [fjh]
we need to find the focus point of the advantages of each approach
15:41:21 [Josh_Soref]
.... dougt is a proponent of simplicity
15:41:24 [fjh]
15:41:31 [Josh_Soref]
... i'd love to hear dougt's reasoning
15:41:36 [fjh]
15:41:40 [fjh]
ack Josh_Soref
15:42:25 [fjh]
josh_soref: in theory it might be possible to change API before it ships, but implementers would prefer not to change code that is already written, due to amount of work before shipping
15:42:37 [fjh]
josh_soref: everyone is trying to move fast without rework
15:43:07 [fjh]
josh_soref: whether the changes are good or not, it still might be hard to obtain implementation. need a very convincing argument
15:43:22 [Josh_Soref]
15:43:23 [Josh_Soref]
15:43:23 [Josh_Soref]
15:43:36 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: we need to make a good case about what the proposal really means
15:43:41 [Josh_Soref]
... rick offered to write a spec
15:43:49 [Josh_Soref]
... maybe someone could write a summary of why it's important
15:44:04 [Josh_Soref]
... what exactly is the defficiency
15:44:09 [AnssiK]
15:44:14 [Josh_Soref]
15:44:17 [Josh_Soref]
ack fjh
15:44:30 [Josh_Soref]
... we need a proposal about why it's necessary
15:44:51 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm not sure i understand, apart from the surface change, what we get
15:44:55 [Josh_Soref]
ack AnssiK
15:45:06 [Josh_Soref]
... i'll ask rick
15:45:12 [fjh]
ack AnssiK
15:45:33 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: i'm assuming mozilla is working on this api because they need it for their os
15:45:38 [Josh_Soref]
... and for their UC, it's working
15:45:44 [fjh]
action: fjh to ask Rick to make proposal for change, summarizing use cases and benefits of change
15:45:44 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-609 - Ask Rick to make proposal for change, summarizing use cases and benefits of change [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2013-01-16].
15:45:54 [Josh_Soref]
... you should question the UCs this current api doesn't address
15:46:04 [Josh_Soref]
... it'd be better if rick tries to build his stuff on B2G
15:46:22 [Josh_Soref]
... to show how his concerns aren't just a stylistic thing, but are a functional gap
15:46:26 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: agreed
15:47:03 [Josh_Soref]
... AnssiK, if you want to summarize to the list
15:47:13 [Josh_Soref]
AnssiK: for the record, i'm indifferent on the design
15:47:21 [Josh_Soref]
... i'm mostly interested in consensus
15:47:37 [Josh_Soref]
topic: Network Service Discovery
15:47:43 [fjh]
15:47:55 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: i think we need richt for this
15:48:03 [Josh_Soref]
... not sure if Cathy has thoughts on this
15:48:17 [Josh_Soref]
Cathy: i think there are questions/comments for richt
15:48:26 [Josh_Soref]
... i think he said that he was working on the mDNS section
15:48:36 [Josh_Soref]
... i think we need to wait for him to come back to us
15:48:39 [fjh]
action: fjh to contact Richt offline re network service discovery
15:48:39 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-610 - Contact Richt offline re network service discovery [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2013-01-16].
15:49:05 [Josh_Soref]
topic: Magnetic Field Events
15:49:07 [richt]
richt has joined #dap
15:49:11 [fjh]
15:50:10 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: question of whether we should be doing this in this group
15:50:14 [Josh_Soref]
... anyone have any comment on it?
15:50:36 [bryan]
sounds OK to me, can we start a wiki for use cases at least?
15:50:50 [Josh_Soref]
dom: my reading of the charter says that it's in scope
15:51:04 [Josh_Soref]
... but it'd be useful to have UCs and Reqs
15:51:09 [AnssiK]
+1 to start with UCs
15:51:16 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: next step is to determine what this is for
15:51:22 [fjh]
I'll respond on the list asking for use cases
15:51:24 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: i'll respond on the list
15:51:37 [Josh_Soref]
topic: Upcoming meetings
15:51:44 [fjh]
F2F - 9-10 April, Location to be determined. Please indicate offers to host.
15:51:58 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: i mentioned Burlington, MA
15:52:06 [Josh_Soref]
... bryan mentioned Seattle or Redmond
15:52:18 [Josh_Soref]
... if people are considering being able to ohst
15:52:21 [Josh_Soref]
15:52:30 [Josh_Soref]
... they could indicate on the list fairly soon
15:52:54 [Josh_Soref]
[ F2F - 9-10 April ]
15:53:09 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: probably need to pick a spot by next week to give organizers lead time
15:53:09 [dom]
[should you re-send a call for hosts to member-device-apis, fjh?]
15:53:17 [Josh_Soref]
bryan: let me confirm i can get a large enough room
15:53:29 [Josh_Soref]
dcheng3: i can probably get an answer by next week
15:53:42 [Josh_Soref]
... 20-30 people?
15:53:46 [Josh_Soref]
... any other requirements?
15:54:50 [Josh_Soref]
RESOLUTION: Meeting Jan 30 is canceled
15:55:08 [Josh_Soref]
topic: Action Review
15:55:18 [fjh]
15:55:19 [fjh]
15:55:26 [Josh_Soref]
topic: AOB
15:55:41 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: thanks all, happy new year
15:55:56 [Josh_Soref]
... AnssiK has actions for ambient light/proximity
15:55:58 [Josh_Soref]
15:56:09 [fjh]
ack Josh_Soref
15:56:19 [Josh_Soref]
... i have actions to update proposals
15:57:12 [Josh_Soref]
Josh_Soref: RTCWeb/WebRTC/MC has a working week
15:57:16 [bryan]
there will be considerable discussion of media capture in that meeting
15:57:25 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: it's in the burlington area (?)
15:57:31 [Josh_Soref]
... Feb 5-7 (?)
15:57:36 [bryan]
We will attend (Dan Druta)
15:57:37 [Josh_Soref]
... i think MC is on the 5th (?)
15:57:48 [Josh_Soref]
dom: MC will be a main topic for the WebRTC part of the meeting
15:57:52 [Josh_Soref]
... probably on 5-6
15:58:00 [Josh_Soref]
... chairs are still refining
15:58:21 [Josh_Soref]
fjh: Josh_Soref, thanks for mentioning that
15:58:25 [dom]
15:58:26 [Josh_Soref]
dom: it's Bedford, MA
15:58:30 [dom]
hosted by ACME Packet
15:59:37 [AnssiK]
AnssiK has left #dap
15:59:44 [Zakim]
15:59:47 [Zakim]
15:59:54 [bryan]
15:59:57 [Zakim]
16:00:03 [Zakim]
16:00:07 [Josh_Soref]
16:00:11 [fjh]
Actions on Anssi to update specs, fjh to reply on list and ask for proposal from Rick, potential f2f hosts to check on hosting
16:00:19 [Zakim]
16:00:40 [dom]
-> Media Capture F2F during WebRTC/RTCWeb meetings
16:00:41 [fjh] <-- WebRTC meeting info
16:00:56 [Josh_Soref]
s| <-- WebRTC meeting info||
16:01:06 [fjh]
Topic: Adjourn
16:01:36 [Josh_Soref]
trackbot, end meeting
16:01:36 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
16:01:36 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been +1.289.261.aaaa, Bryan_Sullivan, fjh, Josh_Soref, +1.781.534.aabb, lgombos, +25686aacc, +49.173.537.aadd, Cathy, dom, dcheng3, AnssiK,
16:01:36 [Zakim]
... Milan_Patel
16:01:44 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:01:44 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
16:01:45 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
I see 6 open action items saved in :
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: anssiK to update Ambient Light specification for LC-2737 , bringing queueing order update from Proximity to Ambient Light [1]
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: anssik to update Proximity and Ambient Light to define events, per LC-2738 [2]
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: anssik to update Ambient Light per LC-2737, bringing any questions to the list [3]
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: fjh to update LC-2731 as completed [4]
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: fjh to ask Rick to make proposal for change, summarizing use cases and benefits of change [5]
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: fjh to contact Richt offline re network service discovery [6]
16:01:45 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:01:46 [Zakim]
16:01:47 [Zakim]
16:01:52 [Zakim]
18:34:33 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dap
18:34:33 [RRSAgent]
logging to
18:34:36 [redactor]
s/scribe: I think we are on the right track/fjh: I think we are on the right track/
18:34:40 [redactor]
RRSAgent, draft mintues
18:34:40 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'draft mintues', redactor. Try /msg RRSAgent help
18:34:43 [redactor]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:34:43 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate redactor
18:35:45 [redactor]
RRSAgent, bye
18:35:53 [redactor]
RRSAgent, make logs world
18:35:57 [redactor]
RRSAgent, bye
18:35:57 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items