Weekly Forms WG Telecon -- 4 Jul 2007

<Nick> sorry but I'm currently in another meeting and won't be able to be on time for the call

<Nick> I'll join in about 15-30 minutes

<Roger> Steven, there is an error in the email you sent about the f2f in Madrid

<Steven> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/32219/xformssummer07/

<Steven> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34637/ftfsept2007/

<Schnitz> brb

<John_Boyer> Steven, ruff :-)

<Schnitz> back

<John_Boyer> Scribe: lars

coming calls

<John_Boyer> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/32219/xformssummer07/

John_Boyer: url for questionnaire is above... everyone, please fill it out

next f2f

<John_Boyer> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34637/ftfsept2007/

Steven: roger, can you send the details for the f2f?
... lots of people will be away in august, so would be good to have the page up early

Roger: rafael will send them along

xforms conference/evening at xml conference

<John_Boyer> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2007Jun/0099.html

John_Boyer: posted list of questions in email

<John_Boyer> Timeblock will be 7:30 - 9:30

John_Boyer: since then I learned that our time slot will be 7:30-9:30

<ebruchez> Roger: are you close from the MAD airport?

<Roger> It depends, 50 Km

<John_Boyer> Sorry, that link should be http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2007Jun/0108.html

John_Boyer: conference organiter already replied
... he said we have only two houres because we have to go after the reception

<ebruchez> Thanks, not that close then ;-)

John_Boyer: otherwise we wouldn't get enough attendance
... best we can do is 3 talks, 15 minutes each
... then a 30 minute address
... and another 3 talks at 15 minutes
... what do others think?
... or should be focus on fewer longer talks
... or should we dispense of the keynote idea and do 6 20 minute talks
... erik, I think shorter talks are a good idea

errr

erik: I think shorter talks are a good idea
... depends on the speaker though

Schnitz: I think 20 minutes would be good to have questions and discussions
... but then we'd need to drop the keynote
... so I'll take this back

John_Boyer: do we want to do a call for papers
... or shall we just invite people

Steven: lets do that

John_Boyer: conference chair thought we were proposing session and wanted to know about session speakers
... so we should get an idea about who the people are going to be
... should we start with WG members?
... maybe send around an email

Schnitz: when there are more then six volunteers, we should debate who speaks rather than select randomly

John_Boyer: should we do a questionaire?

Steven: email is enough

mark: it might be worth to see what people are up to that has coherence with what we are doing
... showing how it runs everywhere
... would underline our point

John_Boyer: variety would be good
... I'd like to show a runtime, but also would like to show a design-time

mark: what about short sections with back-to-back demos
... similar to the lightning talks at xtech

ebruchez: it was hard to do but the audience got a lot out of it

Steven: people at this conference are going to be big fans, as this is an XML conference
... demonstrations and not being afraid of talking about XML will be just great

Schnitz: we are trying to have this "red line" connecting the talks
... when we open this up to www-forms, we might not be able to maintain that
... which might be a good thing, as it gets more heterogenous

mark: maybe not be so restrictive, but maybe just give it a title before we send out an email
... "XML end to end"

John_Boyer: more like "XForms: XML end-to-end"
... we can get away with that at an XML conference ;)

Schnitz: that's cool, lets see what people do with that

John_Boyer: public-forms or www-forms

Schnitz: the latter

Steven: two week s would be a good timeframe
... ask for abstracts

John_Boyer: final question around keynore
... if (a) there is a keynote
... (b) how do we select the speaker

mark: don't think we need a keynote and rather keep it light and show a lot of stuff
... keeping it "hands on"

John_Boyer: downside of not having keynote is that the right keynote speaker would drive up attendance
... upside is we have more room for talks

mark: who were you thinking of

John_Boyer: I was at XML2006 and was suprised to see the effect Michael Kay had

Schnitz: I think there is some merit in that

ebruchez: john, do you know whether michael kay would talk about xforms at all

Schnitz: Kurt Cagl would also be a great choice in my opinion

John_Boyer: at XML2006, Kay did a lot of XForms stuff in his talk

mark: to get the best of both world... I would hope that Kurt would do a talk anyway
... John might approach Michael and see how that works out

Schnitz: I would hope that Michael Kay could also put the topic in a broader context
... CUrt Cagl would have a lot to say about that too
... and a keynote would be a better place for that
... not only technology, but also about the market for XForms in general

forms joint task force

John_Boyer: anyone thinking about participating in that

Schnitz: has it been kicked off yet?

John_Boyer: next step is to get 3 memebers from each WG

Schnitz: I'll join

^w^w^w

;)

John_Boyer: I think our side of the task force should work on xforms simplification

Steven: Roland joined me as co-chair of the XHTML2 WG

action item list

nick: I have to do some catching up on the list

John_Boyer: everyone look at your action items and try to pick one off this week

last call items

<John_Boyer> http://htmlwg.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/xforms-issues/Types?id=97;user=guest;statetype=4;upostype=-1;changetype=-1;restype=-1

John_Boyer: that's issue #97
... seems to call for addtion of examples about invalid email addresses
... this one looks more like anyURI
... can email addresses actually not contain a ':'?

<Nick> yes

John_Boyer: we have a reg-ex for that

Steven: I asked I18N group but haven't heard back yet

John_Boyer: at f2f we discussed something like "any charcter but @" '@' "any charcter but @"

Schnitz: I don't think we should define that
... we should reference it from some other source

<ebruchez> agreed

Schnitz: ask Martin for reference
... but we shouldn't define this on our own

<scribe> ACTION: John_Boyer to add example of invalid email address [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/07/04-forms-minutes.html#action01]

John_Boyer: next issue is #64

Steven: a good example - or two

John_Boyer: next issue is #66
... it says we don't say what the range of the random function is

<Nick> Email Address Internationalization : http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/eai-charter.html

Steven: should be random >= 0 && random < 1

<scribe> ACTION: John_Boyer to fix random function definition [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/07/04-forms-minutes.html#action02]

<John_Boyer> ACTION: John_Boyer to add example of valid power() function result, e.g. power(2, 3) returning 8 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/07/04-forms-minutes.html#action03]

yeah, a bit of context is better

<John_Boyer> :-)

- DRAFT -

Weekly Forms WG Telecon

4 Jul 2007

Attendees

Contents