MBUI Telecon 2012 December 13
From W3C Wiki
- Fabio Paterno
- Davide Spano
- Nikolas Kaklanis
- Paolo Bottoni
- Jaroslav Pullman
- Vivian Motti
- Jean Vanderdonckt
- Dave Raggett
- Gerrit Meixner
- Sebastian Feuerstack
- Heiko Braun
- Dave Raggett
- Current status of the Abstract UI document
- Current status of the Introductory documents
Current status of the Abstract UI document
See Paulo's email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mbui/2012Nov/0023.html
and the updated meta models in the AUI draft where the behaviour is separated off and represented in terms of event-condition-action, and producers and consumers of resources.
Paolo: The idea is to define behaviours separately from the rest of the AUI.
We could could have a range of UI events. We would no longer have a direct connection between the abstract interaction unit.
Fabio: suggest we review the changes and see if we agree,
Davide: comment about the naming.
Paolo: producer, consumer and reader. The presentation doesn't consume resources but rather just checks that they are there.
Paolo: ... support for creation and deletion of abstract UI interactors
Jean: there are now two links for the AUI editor's draft and we may soon have a third. For now the main AUI draft has a second figure for the behaviour model. The first is the updated AUI meta model, its main improvements are:
- link to behaviour which will be defined in separate draft
- ability aggregate sub units to combine input and output
- constraints can be applied to any interaction units (or aggregations thereof)
Paolo: I agree with this except for [...missed...]
Jean: the unit input and output doesn't define what the unit does
Paolo explains how his approach is more open to extensions with new types.
Fabio: which variant would be easier for external people to understand?
Paolo: that would depend on who you ask
Jean: data output is data for presentation to the user.
Jean and Paolo discuss some refinements.
Jean: we have two decisions to make. first is whether we agree on the separation of behaviour as suggested by Paolo, and the second is on hierarchy of event types.
Davide: we associate the behaviour with the interaction units for each kind of unit as appropriate.
Concerned that the proposed approach is harder to understand.
Dave: it would be good to have some specific UI examples and their corresponding abstract UI and behaviour models. This is necessary to explain the rationale to external people.
Jean: any other comments on the meta models in the updated draft?
Please make them on emain and the wiki as we are running short of time in this call.
Davide: think there is another class missing, for a resource that can be read and not consumed.
Jean: we hear the comments and will try to update the document accordingly.
Fabio: no time today for the introductory document ...
Jean: let's start with that on the next call.
Fabio: that document is in a good shape, but does need to some editorial work to make it a bit more fluid. Who is leading that work? We will focus on that next week.