WebApps / Web Components

20 May 2014


See also: IRC log


Dimitri, Art, Domenic_Denicola, Cindy, Deen
Art, Dimitri


<ArtB> Scribe: Art

<ArtB> ScribeNick: ArtB

<xiaoqian> ScribeNick: ArtB

<xiaoqian> Scribe: Art

<dglazkov> Agenda items:

https://www.w3.org/wiki/PointerEvents/Meetings#Meeting_Scribes -> Scribe cheat sheet

<dglazkov> * Shadow DOM survey result: https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-SQX77WF/

Agenda bashing

Scribe+ Dimitri

ScribeNick+ dglazkov

<dglazkov> * Shadow DOM survey results: ttps://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-SQX77WF/

<dglazkov> * Custom Elements ES6 update: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/custom/#es6

<xiaoqian_> Scribe: Dimitri

<xiaoqian_> ScribeNick: dglazkov

Let's get started?

First up: Shadow DOM survey

<ArtB> ScribeNick: ArtB

Shadow DOM survey

DG: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014AprJun/0398.html

… 20 responses

… want to get feedback from those actually using Shadow DOM

… not sure how trustworthy the results are

… but the top 4-5 have the most weight

… first item is significant

<scribe> … closed shadow trees was very low vote even though we talked about it; thus, it appears developers don't care much about it

DG: results are https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-SQX77WF/

DD: need to clarify some definitions

<Domenic> In particular, wondering about shadow as function

<dglazkov> http://blog.quickui.org/2013/11/08/filling-slots-in-shadow/

… that is, need clarification on "shadow-as-function"

DG: currently, older shadow is one participant

… how distributed elements interact

… shadow-as-function give special argument style where contents is distributed into shadow tree

DD: related to imperative API?

DG: no, this about distribution

… imperative API is ranked #6 in the survey

… I would like to work on that but not a high priority for devs based on the survey

… so I think I'll focus on the other items

DD: encapsulation is important to encapsulate video tag (for Servo)

DG: yeah, the devs and implementers have diff priorities

… this survey was targeted at devs

DD: some of the stuff in the middle is more conceptual

… and thus isn't necessarily a high prio for devs or implementers

… clear theming support is the highest prio

DG: think surveys like this can be helpful for other topics

… pleased to see 20 responses

… if there were only 5 or less, I'd be concerned

… if too small a sample, it raises questions on validity

AB: nice to see this survey

… this was the first time we used one

DD: yes agree the survey was good

ES6 and Custom Elements

DG: did some work with Arv re ES6 and Custom Elements

<Domenic> wooohooo!!

<dksmith> Found a mobile IRC client... Woot!

DG: spec now is more ES5 but would like to change it to be more aligned with ES6

<dglazkov> http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/custom/#es6

DG: algorithms in ES6 are much more clear

… f.ex. throw for some errors

… can now specify things I used to `hand wave` before

… can eliminate a lot of prose

DD: really glad to hear this

… think more Web specs should follow this more precise way to write specs

DG: at one point I thought I should just write JS ;-)

[ laughs … ]

DD: with Promises spec and Streams spec I'm using this same rigor

DG: docRegisterElement in ES6 returns value you gave to it

… this is different behavior; not sure how many people noticed this

DD: how does this fit with class syntax?

DG: fine/ok

… just works

AoB or Other Agenda Items

DG: anything else?

AB: there is lots of flexibility re the structure of the meeting

… some meetings can be very bug fixed

DG: yes, I like that

DD: also good to have an opp to understand the bigger picture

AB: I agree Domenic

DKS: would also be helpful to get a review of important bugs

DG: yes, can structure the first part re more general topics

… and then the second part is detailed bugs

DG: one issue is the Shadow DOM Editor and the time of this call

… can we alternate the calls?

… f.ex. one time friendly to US and another friendly to Asia

AB: yes, we can make that happen

DG: another Q/Issue is to get more Web devs to participate

… I was hoping some non-browser people would participate

AB: I think the meeting can be organized to facilitate devs participation

… we just need to be careful about the provenance of the contribution

DG: meeting adjourned

<dglazkov> yay!

<dglazkov> thank you guys for participating!

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2014-05-20 16:35:40 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
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/Cusotm/Custom/
Found Scribe: Art
Found ScribeNick: ArtB
Found ScribeNick: ArtB
Found Scribe: Art
Found Scribe: Dimitri
Found ScribeNick: dglazkov
Found ScribeNick: ArtB
Scribes: Art, Dimitri
ScribeNicks: ArtB, dglazkov
Default Present: +1.650.214.aaaa, Art_Barstow, Dimitri, Domenic, +1.206.612.aabb, Deen, Xiaoqian

WARNING: Replacing previous Present list. (Old list: Domenic, Dimitri, Art, Deen, dglazkov)
Use 'Present+ ... ' if you meant to add people without replacing the list,
such as: <dbooth> Present+ Dimitri, Art, Domenic_Denicola, Cindy, Deen

Present: Dimitri Art Domenic_Denicola Cindy Deen
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014AprJun/0488.html
Got date from IRC log name: 20 May 2014
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/05/20-webapps-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]