14:00:47 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wam
14:00:47 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/12/10-wam-irc
14:00:58 <Zakim> +marcin
14:01:00 <ArtB> rrsagent, make log Public
14:01:12 <ArtB> Scribe: ArtB
14:01:20 <ArtB> ScribeNick: ArtB
14:01:22 <ArtB> Chair: Art
14:01:29 <ArtB> Meeting: Widgets Voice Conference
14:01:37 <ArtB> Date: 10 December 2009
14:01:40 <Zakim> +??P0
14:01:49 <ArtB> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/1202.html
14:02:22 <ArtB> Regrets: Suresh
14:02:49 <steve> Present+ Stephen_Jolly
14:02:51 <ArtB> Present: Art, Marcin, SteveJ
14:03:17 <Marcos> be there in 1 sec
14:03:29 <arve> arve has joined #wam
14:03:44 <fjh> fjh has joined #wam
14:03:50 <Zakim> + +0207868aaaa
14:03:55 <Zakim> +arve
14:04:00 <ArtB> Present+ Arve
14:04:03 <ArtB> Present+ David
14:04:17 <ArtB> Present+ Marcos
14:06:30 <ArtB> Topic: Review and tweak the agenda
14:06:38 <ArtB> AB: the draft agenda was posted on 9 December ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/1202.html ). Any change requests?
14:07:01 <ArtB> DR: would like to add PAG
14:07:08 <ArtB> AB: OK, will add to AOB section
14:07:19 <ArtB> AB: any other change requests?
14:07:21 <ArtB> [ None ]
14:07:28 <ArtB> Topic: Announcements
14:07:34 <ArtB> AB: the only announcement I have is that there will be no call on Dec 24 or Dec 31, thus the last call for 2009 will be on December 17 and we will resume on January 7.
14:08:00 <ArtB> AB: any other annoucements?
14:08:02 <ArtB> [ None ]
14:08:29 <Zakim> +??P18
14:08:44 <ArtB> Present+ Robin
14:09:05 <ArtB> Topic: TWI spec: LC#2 comments
14:09:12 <ArtB> AB: the comment period for TWI LC#2 ended December 8. The only comment was from Kai Hendry. Marcos and Robin responded to Kai's comment and Kai indicated the group's response was satisfactory.
14:09:33 <ArtB> AB: does anyone have any concerns about the way the comments were handled ( http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/WD-widgets-apis-20091117/doc/ )?
14:09:59 <ArtB> [ None ]
14:10:11 <ArtB> Topic: TWI spec: Normative References that are Work In Progress
14:10:22 <ArtB> AB: the TWI spec has 3 normative references that are work in progress: HTML5, Web IDL and Web Storage. This means TWI spec cannot be promoted to Recommendation until these references are "more mature", apparently Proposed Recommendations.
14:10:35 <MikeSmith> MikeSmith has joined #wam
14:10:47 <ArtB> AB: there was a related discussion about this (e.g. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/1157.html ) and the policy, is defined by the Process Document and the Transition Rules.
14:11:15 <ArtB> AB: does anyone have any concerns or questions about this?
14:11:31 <ArtB> [ No ]
14:11:42 <ArtB> Topic: TWI spec: CfC to publish Candidate Recommendation
14:11:49 <ArtB> AB: given we have addressed all of the TWI LC comments, it appears the TWI spec is ready for Candidate. Any comments about that?
14:12:11 <darobin> +1 for CR
14:12:44 <darobin> yes!
14:12:47 <steve> yes
14:12:50 <marcin> yes
14:13:06 <ArtB> AB: proposed Resolution: the TWI spec is ready for publication as a Candidate Recommendation. Any objections?
14:13:21 <ArtB> [ No ]
14:13:27 <ArtB> RESOLUTION: the TWI spec is ready for publication as a Candidate Recommendation
14:13:37 <ArtB> ACTION: barstow submit a Transition Request to publish a CR of the TWI spec
14:13:38 <trackbot> Created ACTION-467 - Submit a Transition Request to publish a CR of the TWI spec [on Arthur Barstow - due 2009-12-17].
14:14:02 <ArtB> AB: thanks to the Editors of the TWI spec - Marcos, Arve and Robin!
14:14:13 <ArtB> Topic: WARP spec: getting wide review of the 8-Dec-2009 LCWD
14:14:22 <ArtB> AB: Besides DAP WG, are there any other WGs or external groups we want to ask for comments re 8-Dec-2009 LCWD?
14:14:35 <ArtB> AB: Note it is very important we get as much review as possible. Additionally, proof of wide review is a requirement to progressing to Candidate Recommendation.
14:15:10 <ArtB> AB: is this something BONDI will reviewing?
14:15:31 <ArtB> DR: yes, more than likely BONDI will review it
14:15:50 <ArtB> AB: do you need me or Team to ask them?
14:15:55 <darobin> should we ask the new security list?
14:15:59 <ArtB> DR: no, I will do that
14:16:15 <ArtB> RB: perhaps we should ask the new security IG
14:16:26 <ArtB> AB: that's a good point; I'll send a request
14:16:38 <ArtB> ACTION: barstow ask public-web-security to review WARP LC
14:16:38 <trackbot> Created ACTION-468 - Ask public-web-security to review WARP LC [on Arthur Barstow - due 2009-12-17].
14:17:14 <ArtB> AB: anything eles on WARP spec for today?
14:17:49 <ArtB> AB: perhaps SteveJ and Marcin can use this time
14:18:04 <ArtB> SJ: I just send an email to the public list
14:18:36 <ArtB> MH: I can provide some info to SJ re discussions related to the "local" WARP requirement
14:18:44 <ArtB> RB: I think Arve has ideas as well
14:19:07 <arve> q+++
14:19:13 <arve> q-++
14:19:14 <ArtB> ... it would be good to get some input from Opera
14:19:26 <arve> zakim, unmute arve
14:19:26 <Zakim> arve was not muted, arve
14:19:32 <ArtB> SJ: any feedback on what Opera has done would be useful
14:19:45 <darobin> zakim, who's here?
14:19:45 <Zakim> On the phone I see Art_Barstow, marcin, ??P0, +0207868aaaa, arve, darobin
14:19:46 <arve> We'll call in again
14:19:47 <Zakim> On IRC I see MikeSmith, fjh, arve, RRSAgent, steve, Zakim, marcin, darobin, tlr, anne, Benoit, ArtB, viper23, shepazu, Marcos, timeless_mbp, trackbot
14:19:55 <Zakim> -arve
14:20:21 <Zakim> +arve
14:20:29 <Benoit_> Benoit_ has joined #wam
14:20:46 <ArtB> Arve: I just started to read SJ'e email
14:20:56 <ArtB> ... I authored the doc from Opera
14:21:13 <ArtB> ... but not sure that feature should be supported
14:21:28 <ArtB> ... think defn of local should be up to the local admin
14:21:48 <ArtB> ... not clear what should happen with IPv6
14:21:56 <ArtB> SJ: there is an RFC for IPv6
14:22:02 <ArtB> ... I'll send it to the list
14:22:12 <ArtB> ... IPv6 is of course more complicated
14:22:35 <ArtB> Arve: what's the use case for knowing what is local and what is not?
14:22:53 <ArtB> SJ: there are some networks with no DNS or know IP addresses
14:23:03 <ArtB> ... but WARP requires an IP address
14:23:16 <darobin> for the record, I think that SJ's use case is definitely a good one
14:23:18 <ArtB> ... therefore as a widget developer cannot address those hosts
14:23:35 <ArtB> Arve: can use "*"
14:23:45 <ArtB> ... in this case
14:24:05 <marcin> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4862#section-5.3
14:24:20 <ArtB> ... the network becomes complicated i.e. the context of what is local
14:24:29 <ArtB> SJ: yes, could use "*"
14:24:42 <ArtB> ... but the UA may not support it
14:24:56 <ArtB> ... especially in a mobile net with operator restrictions
14:25:16 <ArtB> ... it would also give access to *any* IP address on the Internet
14:25:48 <marcin> q+
14:25:56 <ArtB> Arve: I think most devs will use no access or "*"
14:26:08 <ArtB> SJ: not sure that's going to be the case
14:26:20 <marcin> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-access-upnp/ says:
14:26:28 <ArtB> ... I am mostly interested in the mobile case
14:26:29 <marcin> The use of the character string "local" is intended to efficiently and interoperably specify the hosts belonging to the local network. It is assumed that the lack of such a possibility would result in the extensive usage of the U+002A ASTERISK (*) special value and thus could result in the access request policy model being ineffective. 
14:26:59 <ArtB> MH: I just put my comments in IRC
14:27:09 <ArtB> ... they cite the draft I created a while ago
14:27:20 <ArtB> ... I think SJ's comments are captured in my draft
14:27:41 <ArtB> ... Need to limit the network somehow and we need to get agreement on the "how"
14:27:49 <arve> q+
14:28:02 <darobin> ack Marc
14:28:16 <ArtB> ... Needs to work with VPN networks too
14:28:36 <ArtB> ... need to distinguish Internet and Intranet
14:29:03 <ArtB> Arve: why is local/private/Intranet so important it needs to be restricted
14:29:28 <ArtB> ... local network is configurable on the handset
14:29:56 <ArtB> MH: primary use case here is widget I want to run at home that only works on devices in my home
14:30:07 <ArtB> ... e.g. to display images from a UPnP server
14:30:37 <ArtB> ... If I use "*", it contradicts the whole use case as it opens to the entire Internet
14:31:09 <ArtB> Arve: I have an argument against that
14:31:26 <ArtB> DR: need to support defensive depth
14:32:29 <steve> is mDNS sufficiently well-standardised? ISTR it's only an informational RFC, but I might be wrong
14:32:41 <ArtB> MH: need to add more semantics to <access> element
14:33:16 <ArtB> Arve: not sure we it makes sense to separate local and remote on IP addresses
14:33:23 <ArtB> ... think it opens too many holes
14:33:38 <ArtB> SJ: I'd like to understand those holes
14:33:44 <darobin> +1 on SJ making a proposal
14:33:52 <marcin> +1
14:34:00 <arve> +1 on proposal
14:34:15 <ArtB> ... I'll follow-up on the mail list
14:34:17 <darobin> I think that mDNS is reasonably well understood, but let me check
14:34:27 <ArtB> AB: good; let's continue this topic on the list
14:34:31 <timeless_mbp> there are certainly 3-4 useful mDNS impls
14:34:49 <ArtB> Topic: Widget URI spec
14:34:55 <ArtB> AB: after I submitted today's agenda, Larry Masinter responded to several of Robin's replies. The comment tracking doc is ( http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/WD-widgets-uri-20091008/doc/ ). 
14:35:06 <darobin> ah, there appears to be Service Location Protocol (SLP) on standards track
14:35:12 <ArtB> AB: Robin, do we want to discuss any of Larry's emails today?
14:35:36 <Zakim> + +1.850.486.aabb
14:35:51 <ArtB> RB: I haven't looked at LM's emails in detail enough to discuss today
14:35:58 <ArtB> ... hope to respond by tomorrow
14:36:02 <ArtB> AB: OK
14:36:10 <timeless> Zakim: aabb is also me
14:36:21 <ArtB> AB: anything else on LM's comments or the Scheme spec for today?
14:36:23 <ArtB> [ No ]
14:36:36 <marcin> Zakim, aabb is timeless
14:36:37 <Zakim> +timeless; got it
14:36:57 <ArtB> AB: given LM's new emails, we won't discuss CR for Scheme spec today
14:37:04 <ArtB> Topic: AOB
14:37:16 <ArtB> AB: next call is December 17
14:37:30 <ArtB> AB: David, you wanted an update on the WARP PAG?
14:37:45 <Marcos> +q about publishing updates
14:37:54 <ArtB> DR: activity for a PAG should happen within 30 days
14:38:05 <ArtB> ... would like to know if there is any status to share?
14:38:06 <Marcos> +q
14:38:27 <arve> q-
14:39:09 <ArtB> ACTION: barstow ask Team to provide WARP PAG status to the WG
14:39:09 <trackbot> Created ACTION-469 - Ask Team to provide WARP PAG status to the WG [on Arthur Barstow - due 2009-12-17].
14:39:22 <ArtB> DR: would like that to go out by tomorrow
14:39:22 <marcin> mDNS will require some implementation, "local" does not
14:39:26 <ArtB> ... if that is possible
14:40:09 <marcin> trying to make it simpler
14:40:16 <ArtB> MC: I didn't see Updates on the agenda
14:40:41 <ArtB> AB: my recollection is you Marcos agreed to have Updates ready for a new WD pub by 17 Dec
14:40:45 <ArtB> MC: OK, I can do that
14:41:14 <steve> apologies - WUA?
14:41:21 <ArtB> AB: I will try to get the CR for the TWI spec published this year, but timing wise, that may not be possible
14:42:02 <ArtB> AB: are there any other docs we will try to publish by Dec 18?
14:42:30 <ArtB> MC: only the Updates spec and TWI CR
14:42:47 <ArtB> RB: perhaps URI spec but not clear we can do that
14:42:59 <ArtB> AB: anything else on publications?
14:43:03 <ArtB> [ No ]
14:43:09 <ArtB> AB: any other AOB topics?
14:43:14 <ArtB> [ No ]
14:43:20 <ArtB> AB: Meeting Adjourned
14:43:26 <Zakim> -darobin
14:43:30 <Zakim> - +0207868aaaa
14:43:32 <Zakim> -arve
14:43:33 <darobin> ooh, I forgot to ask!
14:43:33 <Zakim> -Art_Barstow
14:43:33 <Zakim> -timeless
14:43:35 <Zakim> -marcin
14:43:38 <Zakim> -??P0
14:43:39 <Zakim> IA_WebApps(Widgets)9:00AM has ended
14:43:40 <ArtB> RRSAgent, make minutes
14:43:40 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/12/10-wam-minutes.html ArtB
14:43:41 <Zakim> Attendees were Art_Barstow, marcin, +0207868aaaa, arve, darobin, +1.850.486.aabb, timeless
14:43:43 <darobin> ArtB: are we canceling calls around christmas?
14:44:10 <darobin> ah, good!
14:44:16 <ArtB> darobin, next call is 17 Dec and the next one after that is 7 Jan
14:44:25 <darobin> purrfect
14:45:06 <Benoit_> Benoit_ has joined #wam
14:45:24 <marcin> what about "local" being also based on LBS, e.g. in the pub?
14:47:12 <steve> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4193 - IPV6 private networks
14:48:59 <marcin> the list of potential use cases may grow, so the spec
14:51:07 <steve> we should take this to the list :-)
14:51:16 <ArtB> zakim, bye
14:51:16 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wam
14:51:31 <ArtB> rrsagent, bye
14:51:31 <RRSAgent> I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/12/10-wam-actions.rdf :
14:51:31 <RRSAgent> ACTION: barstow submit a Transition Request to publish a CR of the TWI spec [1]
14:51:31 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/12/10-wam-irc#T14-13-37
14:51:31 <RRSAgent> ACTION: barstow ask public-web-security to review WARP LC [2]
14:51:31 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/12/10-wam-irc#T14-16-38
14:51:31 <RRSAgent> ACTION: barstow ask Team to provide WARP PAG status to the WG [3]
14:51:31 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/12/10-wam-irc#T14-39-09