From W3C Wiki
< TPAC‎ | 2011
Revision as of 17:02, 8 September 2011 by Avankest (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

TPAC 2011 Session Ideas

We encourage attendees to start brainstorming TPAC2011 session ideas in advance of the meeting, both for cross-group plenary topics and for the breakout sessions.

Please provide:

  • session name (as a === subhead === )
  • session proposer (optional: name a desired session leader, can be yourself)
  • one sentence session summary
  • 1+ paragraph session description

For cross-group plenary session proposals, please also provide:

  • type of session: (e.g.: talk, panel, open discussion, etc.)
  • additional speakers/panelists

Ideas for Cross-Group Plenary Topics

These topics should be relevant to a significant number of W3C groups. They will be discussed in plenary (09:00-10:00). If your topic is not selected by the Program Committee as one of the two plenary topics, please consider leading it as a breakout session.

Deadline for proposals for plenary topics: 1 October

The W3C Publication Process is broken: lets fix it!

Proposed by: Marcos Cáceres The W3C process requiring static version of specs to be published to /TR/ is seriously broken. The labeling of specs are CR, LC, etc. is also broken: specifications don't follow a linear path to reach Recommendation (e.g., Last Call can come after CR, and Last Call documents can go straight to PR). Standards are *living documents* and trying to version them has led to serious fragmentation in the market, confusion from implementers, and confusion from other standards organizations that use W3C specs.

Lets work together to come up with a workable solution to this problem. For a start, lets start taking Editor's draft seriously: for too long, some in the W3C community have pretended that Editor's draft have no official status, when in reality they are usually far ahead of anything in the /TR/ space. Making editor's drafts authoritative on the /TR/ space would overcome many of the problems listed above.

API Design Approaches and the Rationales for Them

  • Led by: Bryan Sullivan/proposed by Ileana Leuca

What API design approaches are browser vendors seeking to promote, and what are the rationales for the choices? How can W3C help the wider Web community (including SDOs that want to Web-enable their standards-based service enablers, or extend the Web platform with new capabilities) follow a successful path to convergence with W3C? For example what are the rationales behind the following API design approaches?

  • declarative (via markup language features, e.g. HTML5's <video> tag)
  • Javascript (object/procedural interfaces ala
  • XHR/REST (using HTTP scheme URLs such as in conventional RESTful Web APIs, and non-HTTP scheme URLs handled by the browser or some local system-registered URL handler)

[Robin Berjon] (My understanding based on the email was that we are to provide feedback inline — if I got that wrong please tell me and I'll fix it.) There are two completely different topics here: the one in the title and the one in the description. I would like to suggest that neither makes for a great plenary session topic. The question of work prioritisation cannot be solved in a plenary fashion. W3C is not a top-down organisation, there is no authority whatsoever that can force a given group to follow some form of release plan. The only way of prioritising a deliverable is to commit resources to provide technical solutions to its issues, edit the relevant documents, and experiment with implementations. The question of rationales and design decisions is certainly interesting, but I don't believe that it can usefully be debated in a plenary fashion either. It would be very useful to describe the tradeoffs one needs make between the listed design approaches, but that requires a lengthy, subtle document that does not currently exist (and is unlikely to be written between now and TPAC). In other words, it is more of a long-term TAG deliverable than a short group chat.

[Bryan Sullivan] Corrected the title... and I agree that a TAG deliverable would probably be a useful result but we need to start a dialog on this with SMEs now, as TAG deliverables are long-term and our need to effectively collaborate on API designs is short-term, e.g. affecting our ability to deliver specifications from DAP.

How can W3C promote convergence in installable Web application technologies?

  • Proposed by: Ileana Leuca

How can we harmonize the objectives, approaches, and capabilities of supporting installable Web applications via:

  • W3C widgets
  • HTML5's AppCache
  • Vendor-specific packaging/manifests, e.g. as used by Google Chrome Web Apps and Firefox Web Apps.

[Robin Berjon] I agree that applications is one of the very big topics and strongly support having a session on this topic. However, I feel that the approach proposed here is far too restrictive for a plenary session. There are now more groups in W3C working on application-related technology than I can quote off the top of my head, and that's not speaking of listing all of their deliverables. I would suggest that we could usefully have a broad session that would try to cover the full landscape not at all in depth but at least trying to capture its breadth.

[Bryan Sullivan] This specific topic could be part of a larger discussion on the effect of fragmentation on the Web applications market, and how to address it for key use cases such as installable Web applications. But it is an important topic for any initiative or service provider that is trying to build a business based upon installable Web application technologies.

Component Model

Discuss how to move forward with the Component Model, a proposed replacement for XBL.

add another session here

  • ...

Ideas for Breakout Sessions

Breakout sessions can cover a wide range of issues: technical issues, cultural issues, future work ideas, presentations of work, etc.

Increasing Global Participation in W3C

  • Proposer/Leader: Ann Bassetti

What more can we do to help people participate comfortably with W3C? What are the barriers or inhibitors and how can we reduce them? Who else wants to participate and can't? Is the English requirement a problem? Are the cost of travel or long-distance calls a problem? Are there cultural differences we should be aware of? Please add to this list & come to the session!

[Debbie Dahl] I thought about this proposal when I went to add my proposals and found the warning text, "If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here." I think this kind of language could be off-putting to people from cultures where merciless editing of other people's writing is considered disrespectful. That might well be an example of a cultural difference that we should be aware of.

Web in the World

  • Proposer/Leader: Debbie Dahl

Not so long ago, the only intelligent device in existence was a traditional desktop computer. The only way to interact with the Web was to sit at a desk in a fixed location. Now the Web is not just accessible from your desk, but, increasingly, the Web is available out in the world, either through mobile devices or through devices present in the environment. Sophisticated processing capabilities are available in many devices, most notably mobile phones and tablets, but also in cars, televisions, and household appliances. These new environments also connect with a rapidly increasing array of sophisticated capture devices, such as biometrics, scanners, and medical sensors. This session will discuss how existing standards can be used to support the Web in the world and what new standards are needed.

Specification Production Ecosystem

  • Proposer/Leader: Robin Berjon

There are many tools available to editors but they are often insufficiently known by their potential users. They also tend to duplicate features that could probably be shared (e.g. a references database). Furthermore, there have been a number of proposals (and at times implementations) for improvements to the way in which specifications are currently marked up, for instance to share more detectable semantics for specific structural items (warnings, notes...) or to make testable assertions extractable. The idea behind this session is to bring those who are interested in improving this ecosystem together, irrespective of their chosen tools, in order to share ideas and see if improvements may be made.

Demos of Applications using W3C Standards

  • Proposer/Leader: Debbie Dahl

This session would invite both implementers of W3C standards as well as developers who use the standards, to showcase creative, innovative, and useful W3C standards-based applications and explain how W3C standards made their applications possible.

User Experience and Privacy for Microphone Access

  • Proposer: Cullen Jennings, Leader: Not Me

Yes, browsers are going to be able to access your microphone and send the resulting media somewhere. The question is how to generate a reasonable level of security and privacy while at the same time having a user experience that is not awful. The idea of the session would be to bring together many of the people of that have thought about this, educate the new people on ideas and experiences from the past, and brainstorm reasonable ideas of how to approach this. Hopefully we would come up with ideas on, or at least educate people on existing ideas, around what access was provided when and what could be done with the resulting media.

[Stefan Håkansson]: I think we should extend the topic to cover camera access as well.

What would make W3C more useful to developers?

  • Proposed by: Ian

I would like W3C to be more useful to developers. Community Groups should provide a more welcoming environment for spec development than we've had before. What else should we do? Some ideas:

  • Provide more useful documentation of "what really works on the Web". More useful might include "looks nicer" or "less geeky than the spec itself."
  • Provide software vendors with tools to help automate the maintenance of up-to-date information about support for standards.

Experimental specifications

Proposed by: Kai Leader: W3C staff

One of the criticisms often directed towards W3C is being too slow. The fact that this is due to a detailed process that attempts to avoid errors or conflicts in the specifications is lost to the public at large.

Would it be possible to open specifications much earlier, allowing early and truly live implementations, to get early feedback from the community?

In part we are seeing this model with the HTML5 spec and it seems to work.

  • This would/could
    • allow implementers to start work with a given spec immediately
    • give clear and early indications of the public interest in a spec or parts thereof
    • provide rapid feedback on applicability to the intended goal
    • provide rapid feedback on potential problems
    • in long term increase specification quality
  • Issues for discussion
    • It would have to be ensured that feedback can and will just as rapidly be processed and lead to necessary changes in a spec.
    • Declaration of specific stages of a spec, giving implementers a certain assurance as to its stability
    • Provision of migration paths from one version to another must be mandatory
    • Provision of a clear and easy to understand process for giving credit to contributors (especially from the general public)

Making W3C more useful for business

Proposed by: Kai Leader: Alan Bird, Bernard Gidon, Jeff Jaffe

I am not saying that W3C is not useful for business, but I think many don't see why that is so.

Have you noticed how most hotels have discovered their conscience for the environment?

They appeal to you, the guest, to not throw your towel on the floor, if it is not really disgustingly dirty. No mention of the fact that they, in fact, simply save money by not washing all those towels all the time.

We play along. Let them save their money. Less detergent in the environment is in fact better too.

Do business really care about standardization?

I don't think so. Not as part of their DNA.

I think they are interested in earning money, which is perfectly acceptable. If there is money to be made using standards then they are all for it.

Therefore, can we make it appealing to businesses to use standards, to work with W3C developed technology?

Can we find the "towel trick" for business?

What are the key factors that businesses have found so far?

What can we learn from that?

Is there a way to create niche markets, based on technology, that does not have to be based on proprietary technology?

If not, how can W3C help here?

The businesses who are already members have decided, for various reasons, that it is good to participate. Why? What can they tell us?

But what about the rest, the great masses out there?

Which information can we give them, which examples can be shown to make it clear that it saves you money/earns you money if you use standardized, open technology?

Cloud Computing (Exact title to come later)

MCF proposes this title: "Building Apps in the Cloud"

Chaired by: Said Tabet, EMC

Stay tuned as this session comes into view!

  • potential speakers:, Amazon?

Advances in Social Network standardization

Proposed by: Laurent-Walter Goix. Leader: TBD

This session would invite both authors of relevant open specifications in the area of Social Networking as well as developers to discuss their experience on implementing these specifications. The goal of the session is to bring together the widest possible set of open initiatives focused on standardizing social networks at various levels (e.g. client-server protocols, data models, server-to-server federation, end-to-end integration, mobile optimization) through talks that illustrate their specification, current issues and roadmap. Developers may be involved to showcase demos & provide feedback. Ideally a final panel would discuss specific topics (e.g. user addressing, discovery) to better understand main issues and collaboration opportunities across these initiatives.

Feedback from the World Wide Web Foundation

Proposed by: Debbie Dahl Leader: TBD

This session would provide an opportunity for staff from the World Wide Web Foundation to talk about their feedback on W3C standards based on their experiences in the developing world or other Foundation activities.

HTML5 and Games

Chaired by: Ted Leung, Disney

This session will discuss issues that arise when trying to build games using HTML5. We may also discuss formation of a Community Group around this topic. What are the standardization needs?

add another session here

  • ...