See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 21 August 2013
<jasonjgw> Janina notes that visa applications can be time-consuming and that participants should take this into account in making applications.
<MichaelC> close item 1
<MichaelC> close item 21
<MichaelC> close item 2
<jcraig> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndieUI/raw-file/default/src/indie-ui-events.html#UIFocusRequestEvent
<jasonjgw> James notes the addition of an enumeration for focus types (of focus request events in the Events module). This is in line with emerging WebIDL conventions.
<jasonjgw> He notes further IDL changes - initializers etc., based on comments received.
<MichaelC> drop item 12
<jcraig> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndieUI/raw-file/default/src/indie-ui-events.html#hasFeature
<jasonjgw> James notes that direct object detection (testing for the existence of an object in the code) is often possible.
<jcraig> "org.w3c.indieui.events.collapserequest"
<jasonjgw> has been proposed, but the required interface has now been deprecated
<jasonjgw> James is seeking input as to how to support object detection appropriately.
<jcraig> DOM spec has deprecated hasFeature, so this is no longer useful
<jasonjgw> He clarifies that the problem to be solved is that of detecting whether given events are defined/supported by the implementation.
<jcraig> Need a way to do IndieUI object detection, or "implementation" detection for specific event types
<jcraig> http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-domimplementation-hasfeature
<jcraig> Note: hasFeature() originally would report whether the user agent claimed to support a given DOM feature, but experience proved it was not nearly as reliable or granular as simply checking whether the desired interfaces, attributes, or methods existed. As such, it should no longer be used, but continues to exist (and simply returns true) so that old pages don't stop working. SVG features are a separate mechanism that reused the existing method, so they co[CUT]
<jcraig> to work as a special case.
<jasonjgw> Janina raises the issue of whether other W3C activities (DOM 3, 4, etc.), may address this need.
<jasonjgw> The question is whether there is a cross-working-group dependency here.
<jasonjgw> James suggests finding alternative mechanisms rather than challenging the deprecation of the existing interface by the DOM WG.
<jcraig> Node.isSupported()
<jasonjgw> could be an alternative mechanism.
<jcraig> if (window.indieui.events.collapserequest)
<jasonjgw> Michael asks which of the alternatives is most widely used and why the "official" method has been deprecated.
<jasonjgw> James understands that some implementations implemented the features but not the identifying strings and hence object detection proved more reliable.
<jasonjgw> Michael clarifies in response to a question that the detection mechanism may still be needed even if none of the IndieUI events is defined in the spec as optional, due to non-conforming/partially conforming implementations.
<jcraig> In the same spec, Node.isSupported() is listed http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-node-issupported
<jcraig> W3 version is exactly the same
<jcraig> http://www.w3.org/TR/domcore/#dom-domimplementation-hasfeature
<jcraig> Need to ask DOM group if there is similar concern with Node.isSupported and if not, is this okay to use? http://www.w3.org/TR/domcore/#dom-node-issupported
<jasonjgw> Michael clarifies that HTML and Web Applications working groups are relevant.
<jasonjgw> Michael notes a range of communication options - via informal questions, between respective wg chairs, or formal comments on their spec.
<jasonjgw> James takes an action to make the contact and raise the issue with Web Applications wg in the first instance.
<jcraig> ACTION: jcraig to ask DOM group about Node.isSupported http://www.w3.org/TR/domcore/#dom-node-issupported is okay to use, given that hasFeature has been deprecated: http://www.w3.org/TR/domcore/#dom-domimplementation-hasfeature [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/08/21-indie-ui-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-66 - Ask dom group about node.issupported http://www.w3.org/tr/domcore/#dom-node-issupported is okay to use, given that hasfeature has been deprecated: http://www.w3.org/tr/domcore/#dom-domimplementation-hasfeature [on James Craig - due 2013-08-28].
<jasonjgw> These are normative issues that have been resolved (as noted in editor's report above).
<jasonjgw> James undertakes to follow up on the discussion thread.
<jcraig> New IME-API draft: http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-ime-api-20130815/
<jasonjgw> Input method editor spec noted in discussion - updated working draft of potential relevance to our group.
<jasonjgw> Michael notes we should probably review it.
<jcraig> James' response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2013JulSep/0324.html In general, much improved (black hole <canvas> editor no longer used as primary example), but still has some clarification questions. Thread ongoing. I think this was more of an ARIA 2.0 issue (for custom RTE) and it doesn't really relate to IndieUI.
<jasonjgw> Janina notes that it will be taken up in PF.
<jasonjgw> This is on Michael's agenda to continue to work on, starting from the second step - extracting requirements from use cases.
<jasonjgw> He also notes that we need to consider whether, and if so when to publish a formal requirements document - ideally prior to Last Call of Events.
<jasonjgw> It could be published as a note on the TR page, or as a document elsewhere on the W3C site (but it may be preferable to do so otherwise than in the wiki, where it may languish and fail to attract review).
<jasonjgw> Janina notes that published requirements are more helpful and useful notwithstanding the additional work involved in their preparation.
<jasonjgw> Michael notes the importance of encouraging public review and that a formal W3C note may be the best way to achieve this (but he isn't arguing for it strongly at this point).
<MichaelC> ACTION: cooper to make a proposal for formalizing IndieUI requirements [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/08/21-indie-ui-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-67 - Make a proposal for formalizing indieui requirements [on Michael Cooper - due 2013-08-28].
<scribe> scribe: janina
jason: we agreed to prepare
question for implementers
... will we be able to synthesize events?
... Working on details of this with Michael, but no draft to
sshare with the WG yet
<jasonjgw> Andy is working on use cases and plans to liaise with Rich Schwerdtfeger on the subject as opportunity permits.
<jasonjgw> Work is ongoing.
jason: reviewing ISO 24751 with ref to doc Rich Schwerdtfeger circulated on Xtech
<jasonjgw> There is discussion of a document on need/preference profile construction (obtaining needs/preferences from users) circulated on W3C lists recently.
<jcraig> ACTION-63?
<trackbot> ACTION-63 -- Michael Cooper to Need a glossary section for term references -- due 2013-08-02 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/track/actions/63
<jasonjgw> This item can be closed.
<jcraig> RESOLVED: Close ACTION-63
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/.html/.html In general, much improved (black hole <canvas> editor no longer used as primary example), but still has some clarification questions. I think this was more of an ARIA 2.0 issue (for custom RTE) and it doesn't really relate to IndieUI./ Succeeded: s/clarification questions./clarification questions. Thread ongoing./ Found Scribe: janina Inferring ScribeNick: janina Default Present: jasonjgw, Michael_Cooper, janina, James_Craig, Andy_Heath, +1.646.707.aaaa, Rich_Simposon, Rich_Simpson Present: jasonjgw Michael_Cooper janina James_Craig Andy_Heath +1.646.707.aaaa Rich_Simposon Rich_Simpson Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-indie-ui/2013Aug/0006.html Found Date: 21 Aug 2013 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/08/21-indie-ui-minutes.html People with action items: cooper jcraig[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]