W3C

- DRAFT -

WAF WG's Widgets Voice Conf

06 Mar 2008

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Art, Marcos, Claudio, Ben_(BW), Benoit_(BS), Arve
Regrets
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art

Contents


 

Date: 6 March 2008

<scribe> Scribe: Art

<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

<benW> Marcos, we're in the process of doing so at the moment

Agenda Review

AB: any changes?

MC: I was hoping Arve would participate but I'm OK with the agenda

AB: I'll follow up with Arve to determine his status
... important to have active participation from Opera

Charter Update

<arve> sorry, a bit late

<arve> will call in in a minute

<marcos_> cool

AB: I talked to Mike Smith earlier this week and he said the charter is still being reviewed by the Team
... it seems unlikely the "mega charter" will prevail
... and more likely that at least two WGs will be be proposed
... and the AC4CSR spec may be in a separate WG just for that spec

Publication Moratorium for 1H08

<anne> for real?

<anne> wow

<anne> that's silly

<marcos_> it's called the Anne Working Group

AB: the upcoming AC meeting and WWW2008 in April is cause for a moratorium
... April 15 is the deadline for publication requests

<anne> seems easier to move it away from the W3c again then though, given all the overhead

AB: I will be making a WAF/Widgets preso at WWW2008
... It would be great to have some new pubs out before the conf

MC: we can try to publish all 3 widgets doc on that date

AB: that would be fantastic

BS: are your slides ready?

AB: not yet

BS: would be good for our internal presentation

AB: understand

<scribe> ACTION: submit the slides to the WG before presenting them at WWW2008 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-waf-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - submit

<scribe> ACTION: Barstow submit the slides to the WG before presenting them at WWW2008 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-waf-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-173 - Submit the slides to the WG before presenting them at WWW2008 [on Arthur Barstow - due 2008-03-13].

<marcos_> Widget presentation: http://www.slideshare.net/mcaceres/widgets-125319

f2f Meeting

AB: Guido told me yesterday he needs one more day to try to find funding to host the meeting in Dublin
... I will give him another 24 hours

ABe: I
... I'm ok with either

AB: Claudio, June 3-5 in Turin is OK?

Claudio: yes

Widgets Spec

AB: issues: http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/waf/products/5
... I've been thinking about a Level 1 and Level 2 split of the spec

ABe: I agree to some extent
... for example Bernardo will not be able to contribute to the PKCS#7 discussion
... I think we need to leave some stuff off the table for L1

MC: I think we've essentially agreed on Dig Signatures
... but we still have a few issues e.g. how much of XPath and Cannon to implement

AB: proposal to close Issue #12 with a resolution that we will use XML Signature
... any objections?

[none]

RESOLUTION: we will use XML Signature and close issue #12 accordingly

Level 1 and Level 2

MC: I agree as well
... I've already mades some spec simplifications just within the last week
... e.g. folder stuff

CV: can you assign a timeframe for L1 and L2?
... e.g. when would a L2 spec be ready for impl?
... I don't think the market would wait too long

MC: if you can help Edit Claudio that would help
... us to make progress
... we need inputs for most if not all of the red blocks
... our goal for L1 is October Last Call

CV: and then start thinking about L2 in October?

MC: you could start L2 now
... we could publish it when its ready e.g. technically sound, etc.

<marcos_> L1: packaging format (zip), Config document, Processing model, base API, base events, digital sigs

<marcos_> Processing model = XML Processing and how to process the package (files, folders)

BW: I agree in principle to concentrate on the basics so I support the L1 and L2 split

<benoit> BS: the question is really to decide if an L2 finalized can be added to the spec

MC: I think yes
... if the items are ready, we could move them into L2

CV: I understand the concerns Marcos is raising i.e. who's going to actually do the work
... we are particularly interested in the cross-widget messaging stuff

MC: we need an input for that
... as Nokia did with their digital signature input

CV: OK, I'll think about it

MC: I consider section 4 and 5 essentially done

AB: we could rename the spec back to Widget Packaging Spec

ABe: I'm in favor of something like Widget Packaging and Signature spec
... I don't think the cross-widgets messaging stuff should be in the spec at all since that functionality is part of HTML5
... and update is specified separately
... rather than thinking about L1 and L2 should be thinking in terms of extensions

MC: I would like this to be more modular as well; could even move the APIs to a separate spec

CV: I'm not an HTML5 expert but I'm not sure if the Widgets cross-messaging requirements are fully covered by what is in HTML5

ABe: HTML5 probably satisfies the requirements for Widgets

CV: I just wanted to know if our Widgets Reqs are covered by HTML5

MC: I recommend reviewing the HTML5 model to see it covers the requirements you are thinking about
... postMessage

CV: we have been looking at the Open Ajax model
... they are using a pub/sub model
... and it seems like a good starting point

MC: please do some analysis and let us know what you learned

AB: to summarize, there is support for focusing on core functionality
... this could mean three separate docs:
... 1. Zip, config, Procssing model
... 2. basic APIs and events
... 3. Signature
... we could then add other specs as needed
... is this what we want to do?

BS: this is more docs. Is this OK with you Marcos?

MC: I would Arve to take the APIs and Events

ABe: that will be difficult for me to meet by the April 15 deadline

MC: I can take the signauture part and ask TLR for some help

AB: I can help of the signature part too
... regarding doc #2, for April 15 we could just cut-and-paste what we have now
... is splitting the doc into these 3 parts doable by April 15?

MC: yes

<arve> Looking at section 7, we have mostly complete text

AB: proposals to split the current doc into three parts as described above
... any objections?

[none]

<arve> no

RESOLUTION: the Widgets 1.0 spec will be split into three separate specs

<marcos_> :)

AB: anything else for today?
... next week will start with section 4.1

<claudio> quit

AB: meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Barstow submit the slides to the WG before presenting them at WWW2008 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-waf-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: submit the slides to the WG before presenting them at WWW2008 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-waf-minutes.html#action01]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2008/03/06 13:04:07 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133  of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: Art
Found ScribeNick: ArtB

WARNING: Replacing previous Present list. (Old list: Art, Marcos, Claudio, Ben)
Use 'Present+ ... ' if you meant to add people without replacing the list,
such as: <dbooth> Present+ Art, Marcos, Claudio, Ben_(BW), Benoit_(BS)

Present: Art Marcos Claudio Ben_(BW) Benoit_(BS) Arve
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-appformats/2008Mar/0001.html
Found Date: 06 Mar 2008
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-waf-minutes.html
People with action items: barstow submit

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]