See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 23 January 2014
<paulc> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-wg-announce/2014JanMar/0005.html
<paulc> scribenick: jaymunro
<paulc> ACTI
<paulc> O
https://www.w3.org/bugs/public/show_bug.cgi?id=21579 [Steve Faulkner]
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/234
ACTION-235: Resolve 19728
<trackbot> Notes added to ACTION-235 Resolve 19728 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19728.
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19728 [Edward O'Connor]
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/235
<paulc> ACTION-234?
<trackbot> ACTION-234 -- Steve Faulkner to Resolve bug 21579 and will provide spec text https://www.w3.org/bugs/public/show_bug.cgi?id=21579 -- due 2014-01-23 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/234
<paulc> ACTION-235?
<trackbot> ACTION-235 -- Edward O'Connor to Resolve 19728 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19728 -- due 2014-01-23 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/235
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19728 [Edward O'Connor]
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/235
these were sent out in dec, and we're down to about 6-7 CR bugs
Steve's been busy with other accessibility work. We'll keep them open with their existing due dates
topics: Canvas 2D revised Candidate Recommendation or Last Call
Status: All outstanding CR bugs have been resolved. Awaiting candidate Canvas Last Call and Canvas L2 heartbeat documents.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Jan/0055.html
only sub item is how we're going to deal with Canvas. A11y sub task group has now resolved all the CR bugs related to focus ring
by next week will confirm by next week the edits are ok. The editors will make the docements ready for LC.
Paul: not worried about canvas specs will keep up with other specs. Canvas will follow a week or so later
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Jan/0035.html
this is the 2nd last call, minimum of 3 weeks with the discussion of whether it's normative or not.
<scribe> topic :b) CfC: to publish “HTML 5.0" and "HTML 5.1" heartbeat Working Drafts – closes Tue Jan 28
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Jan/0035.html
Paul: not much to say about them, other then keeping them up to date
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Jan/0037.html
this comes to us from the a11y task force, rather than loading the image description into the spec, it's in last call. group thinks it will go directly to proposed recomendation without a CR period.
remind people CR is optional.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Jan/0041.html
this has been folded back into HTML and HTML5 specs. There was a ruby bug now as well.
since originally it was pub'd as a tr doc, it should be cleaned up and point to html spec
e) CfC: to publish a Last Call “DOM4” Working Draft – closes Tue Jan 28
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Jan/0042.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Jan/0042.html
an important normative ref to 5.0. This will take DOM4 to last call, will take 4 weeks. Comment from Charles, 4 weeks is ok unless someone asks for an extension.
a longer review period will be considered if brought up.
Philip did a good chair session this morning that will be available publicly soon.
<paulc> Talking about a Spring F2F
plh: I went backward from last
week. The assistance at the TAG event wasn't correct, need to
check that. Need to check on the scope of the workshop.
... got some pushback from webapps about not doing a tpac this
year.
Subsitute the spring f2f as a mini-tpac.
trying to get folks to move, get people to book rooms. Need to get the rooms farther ahead of time. To come up with dates, PLH needs to know what the needs are
plh: we have other people working
on a date report of the testing status. approved, and pending
approval to see what tests are being worked on.
... we're hoping that we will get a final picture of the range
of tests. We are able to generate implementation reports for
the entire test suite. Our biggest weakness is section 5. Need
to make a push on getting tests for section 5.
paulc: you mentioned if people could approve pull requests on tests.
plh: there is a push on the platform to get the pull requsts under 120. When from 50 pull requestions to 48 on html spec.
<cabanier_> SteveF: Chrome, IE and some engineers from mozilla agree
plh: will cross to kris about focusing on section 56
section 5
<cabanier_> SteveF: when I asked for review of my patch for firefox, the reviewer talked to hixie.
<cabanier_> SteveF: and Hixie changed the spec so it states the opposite of what we agreed upon
<cabanier_> SteveF: I'm hopeful that the patch will land in FF
PLH: we think we can get these
done in the next few months. Section 5 is the part on loading
webpages. We feel we have some dragons in that are. and need to
work with the working group
... We're trying to get a test for every feature in the spec,
for consideration of being dropped if not implemented.
<plh> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/HTML_Normative_References
PLH: robin did an update on a page where we traced the normative references for status. robin updated this week, so the wiki has the latest data.
<SteveF> cabanier_:ok, thanks was just looking at the whatwg spec and didn't see it changed so wondered
PLH: good progress on the latest front.
Paulc: what about things that are outside the working group, like webidl?
<cabanier_> SteveF: https://github.com/w3c/html/commit/1d400d3ad11a5b79d75902ef0f4ea69ba6a03001
PLH: how much pressure do we need to apply to other groups? How do we need them to complete that document? Thats what the new version is about, some we should worry, other we shouldn't worry.
<cabanier_> SteveF: https://github.com/w3c/html/commit/2728a6de9219617dcc51c4160819d262e1dc8ba1
PLH: I released this this morning. Plan is to talk to the groups. For WebIDL we know the status, biggest issue is implementation. test suite not approved but fully reviewed.
issue is that we don't have complete implementation.
the issue is that we don't have complete implementation.
PLH: that's it.
<SteveF> cabanier_: but drawFocusIfNeeded(element) not in there yet
Paulc: call for scribe? Krisk next week, with backup.
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) Found ScribeNick: jaymunro Inferring Scribes: jaymunro WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: ACTION-235 Daniel_Austin Eliot Lachy Microsoft P17 P20 PLH Paul Sam Status SteveF cabanier_ https jaymunro paulc rubys scribenick tantek trackbot You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-wg-announce/2014JanMar/0005.html WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 23 Jan 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/01/23-html-wg-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]