13:02:19 RRSAgent has joined #wam 13:02:19 logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-wam-irc 13:02:20 promise!! 13:02:21 RRSAgent, make logs public 13:02:21 Zakim has joined #wam 13:02:22 There is a first time for everything 13:02:23 Zakim, this will be DOM3 13:02:23 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot 13:02:24 Meeting: Web Applications Working Group Teleconference 13:02:24 Date: 27 May 2010 13:02:38 zakim, this will be webapps 13:02:38 ok, Steven, I see IA_WebApps(Widgets)9:00AM already started 13:02:38 zakim, this will be widgets 13:02:39 ok, Marcos, I see IA_WebApps(Widgets)9:00AM already started 13:02:48 zakim, who is here? 13:02:48 On the phone I see wonsuk 13:02:49 On IRC I see RRSAgent, wonsuk, shepazu, Steven, MikeSmith, timeless_mbp, ArtB, Marcos, tlr, kenneth, joaoeiras, steve, timeless, trackbot 13:03:27 +Marcos 13:03:28 RRSAgent, make log public 13:03:43 +Art_Barstow 13:03:57 ScribeNick: ArtB 13:03:59 Scribe: Art 13:04:00 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/0849.html 13:04:02 Chair: Art 13:04:03 Meeting: Widgets Voice Conference 13:04:05 Regrets: Robin 13:04:10 zakim, dial steven-617 13:04:10 ok, Steven; the call is being made 13:04:12 +Steven 13:04:22 Present: Art, Marcos, StevenP 13:04:48 02Wonsuk Lee01 13:04:58 Present+ Wonsuk_Lee 13:05:43 Topic: Review and tweak agenda 13:06:05 AB: I posted the draft agenda yesterday ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/0849.html ). Arve asked me in IRC to add gzip discussion ( 13:06:06 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/0839.html ) and we will add that to the AOB agenda item. 13:06:32 MC: Arve isn't here today 13:06:39 ... so he may not join the call 13:06:53 AB: if he joins us, we can discuss it 13:07:01 AB: any change reqs? 13:07:03 [ None ] 13:07:09 Topic: Announcements 13:07:28 AB: June 1 is the deadline for comments for 11-May-2010 LC of Digital Signatures for Widgets ( http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-widgets-digsig-20100511/ ) 13:08:22 WL: I am from ETRI in Korea 13:08:32 ... I am Editor in W3C 13:08:38 ... in the MAWG 13:08:44 ... also participate in DAP WG 13:08:54 ... also interested in WebApps WG 13:09:04 ... as well as HTML5 13:09:26 AB: thanks for that intro; welcome 13:09:37 Topic: Packaging and Configuration spec 13:09:44 AB: Richard Ishida submitted 5 comments I18N-related comments last week. Marcos, what is the status? 13:09:59 AB: any discussion? 13:10:06 MC: they are all addressed 13:10:14 ... I took all of his suggestions 13:10:37 ... re #20, they originaly recommended using xml:lang 13:10:51 AB: were all of the changes Editorial? 13:10:54 MC: yes 13:11:12 ... #20 would be substantial but they said they did NOT expect us to change the spec 13:11:24 AB: that is consistent with my interpretation 13:11:37 AB: On May 20 Richard indicated ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010May/0032.html ) Addison is going to respond to our request asking if the I18N WG is OK with our changes (or not). I still haven't received a response from him 13:12:07 AB: I followed up with Addison yesterday ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010May/0044.html ) and still no response. 13:12:32 AB: is Addison I18N WG chair? 13:12:34 SP: yes 13:12:45 AB: the P&C's PR is blocked on this 13:13:42 AB: anything you can do Steven to get Addison to reply would be very much appreciated 13:13:46 SP: I'll do my best 13:14:02 AB: have you heard anything from Addison, Marcos? 13:14:04 MC: no 13:14:17 AB: we'll have to leave this as an open action 13:14:38 AB: anything else on P&C spec for today? 13:14:40 [ no ] 13:14:46 Topic: Widget Interface (TWI) spec 13:14:54 AB: as we know, the PR for the TWI spec is blocked on ISSUE-116 ( http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/116 ) and ACTION-550 ( http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/550 ) re Security Considerations for the openURL method. 13:15:24 AB: any status to report on this, Marcos? 13:15:33 MC: I still need to follow-up 13:15:41 AB: is there anything you need from the rest of us? 13:15:46 MC: no, I don't think so 13:15:53 ... I just need to restart the conversation 13:16:07 ... Adam is suggesting what I think the spec already says 13:16:16 ... so we may have general agreement 13:16:21 ... I don't want to remove the method 13:16:42 AB: what about enumerating the schemes? 13:16:47 MC: I don't think we want to do that 13:17:09 ... a UA can support any number of schemes 13:17:20 ... don't want to limit UAs flexibility 13:17:59 ... not clear where the spec boundary should be when it comes to things like the cost to a user to use a particualar scheme 13:18:16 AB: I tend to agree with you and thought your proposal was reasonable 13:18:31 ... Nevertheless we do need to get consensus on the text 13:18:38 MC: yes, agree 13:19:00 AB: anything else on TWI for today? 13:19:04 MC: no, don't think so 13:19:14 Topic: View Modes Media Features spec 13:19:21 AB: VMMF ACTION-552 - Add requirements to spec - must be fixed before next publication ( http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/552 ) 13:19:37 AB: the reqs are mandatory before going to Candidate 13:19:51 ... Robin knows this and is plannign to do the editorial work 13:20:04 AB: the 3 commentors on the LC replied they are OK with our responses ( http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/WD-view-mode-20100420/doc/ ) 13:20:25 AB: as such, I think the spec is ready to publish as a Candidate Recommendation. 13:20:35 MC: I agree 13:20:50 AB: any other comments re VMMF and it being "CR worthy"? 13:20:56 AB: I think it is ready 13:21:27 ... there is just one assertion re UA behavior 13:21:30 MC: yes, true 13:21:38 ... there could be a set of tests per mode 13:21:59 AB: proposed resolution: the group agrees the VMMF spec is ready for Candidate Recommendation 13:22:04 AB: any objections? 13:22:13 AB: I support CR 13:22:21 MC: I support it 13:22:38 I support it as well 13:22:40 SP: fine by me 13:22:46 WL: support it as well 13:23:05 RESOLUTION: the group agrees the VMMF spec is ready for Candidate Recommendation 13:23:31 AB: any thoughts on the length of the Candidate? 13:23:37 MC: I would go with the minimum 13:23:51 ... there are already several impls that support the modes 13:24:00 ... probably need about 20 tests 13:24:22 AB: I don't think a CR has a minimum period 13:24:37 MC: probably should say at least one month 13:25:00 AB: OK, so 4 weeks after the CR is published 13:25:56 ... we need to add requirements 13:26:05 ... the SotD needs to reflect CR 13:26:20 ... we should also create at least a stub Implementation Report 13:26:40 MC: this is the requirement http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-reqs/#display-modes 13:26:55 ACTION: marcos create an Implementation Report doc for the VMMF spec 13:26:55 Created ACTION-555 - Create an Implementation Report doc for the VMMF spec [on Marcos Caceres - due 2010-06-03]. 13:27:11 ACTION: robin notify ArtB when the VMMF is ready for a TransReq 13:27:15 Created ACTION-556 - Notify ArtB when the VMMF is ready for a TransReq [on Robin Berjon - due 2010-06-03]. 13:27:36 ACTION: barstow work with StevenP to schedule a Candidate call with the Director 13:27:36 Created ACTION-557 - Work with StevenP to schedule a Candidate call with the Director [on Arthur Barstow - due 2010-06-03]. 13:28:15 AB: anything else on VMMF for today? 13:28:55 MC: there is a redirect problem: "I just noticed that /TR/widgets-vmmf is not redirecting to /TR/view-mode. To avoid confusion, can you please make sure it does." 13:30:55 Topic: GZIP and widget packaging 13:31:03 AB: the original thread on widget packaging and GZip started on April 28 with an email by Gregg Tavares ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/0349.html ). A point of interest is a stream-able format. 13:31:24 AB: since then, Doug started some renewed discussion ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/0839.html ) perhaps because of Google's announced a way to package Web Apps in Chrome browser. 13:32:02 AB: note WebApps proposed charter extension ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webapps/charter/Overview.html#deliverables ) includes a "Widgets Embedding" deliverable that, if approved by the Director, could potentially be used to rationalize at least part of these use cases "a mechanism to allow embedding of packaged applications within other Web content, such as referencing via the HTML object element" 13:32:48 AB: without Arve here, we won't do a deep dive 13:32:58 ... but we can talk about it 13:33:19 MC: if we do another format, P&C should be split up 13:33:27 ... put the config file in a separate spec 13:33:41 ... and packaging seperate 13:34:02 AB: it is an interesting idea and one we should discuss 13:34:18 ... but I don't think it should be done before P&C goes to PR 13:34:23 +Josh_Soref 13:34:40 ... we should complete P&C before doing any kind of splitting 13:35:03 Present+ Josh 13:35:39 MC: Arve is suggesting separating configuration doc from the packaging mechanism 13:35:50 http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2010-May/026506.html 13:35:52 ... some related discussions in WHATWG channels 13:36:21 AB: oh, this is interesting, I hadn't seen this 13:36:55 MC: this is also quite relevant to the debate http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2010-May/026503.html 13:37:17 ... I do like the idea of separating the config data from the packaging mechanism 13:38:36 hsivonen's message is http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2010-May/026503.html 13:39:15 -Josh_Soref 13:39:37 AB: this is good info Marcos 13:39:44 +Josh_Soref 13:39:55 ... I think we should plan to add this topic to the June 3 call 13:40:11 AB: anything else on this topic for today? 13:40:22 Topic: AOB 13:40:28 AB: any other topics for today? 13:40:48 MC: I've done some more work with a QA colleague on the I18N tests 13:40:56 ... we have about 1/2 of them ready 13:41:03 ... will submit to CVS 13:41:18 ... there is an open question about licensing 13:41:26 ... we now have a script that adds the license 13:41:59 AB: is that what Rigo suggested? 13:42:13 MC: yes, we are following Rigo Wenning's recommendation 13:42:17 AB: ok; excellent 13:42:52 ... notify me when you have checked in one of these test cases as I'd like to see how the licensing is done 13:43:00 AB: next call is June 3; there will be no call on June 10. 13:43:08 AB: depending on the nature of any comments we receive for the Digital Signature for Widgets LC, we may be in a position on June 3 to discuss publishing a Candidate of that spec 13:43:58 ... that would give us 5/7 widget specs in Candidate 13:44:27 MC: perhaps we can do a combined Director's call 13:44:35 AB: I thought of that too 13:45:05 ACTION: barstow work with StevenP on the logisitics of two CRs during the same Director's call 13:45:05 Created ACTION-558 - Work with StevenP on the logisitics of two CRs during the same Director's call [on Arthur Barstow - due 2010-06-03]. 13:46:50 AB: meeting adjourned 13:47:00 -Marcos 13:47:04 RRSAgent, make minutes 13:47:04 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-wam-minutes.html ArtB 13:47:05 -Steven 13:47:07 wonsuk has left #wam 13:47:07 -Art_Barstow 13:47:08 -Josh_Soref 13:48:19 zakim, bye 13:48:19 leaving. As of this point the attendees were wonsuk, Marcos, Art_Barstow, Steven, Josh_Soref 13:48:19 Zakim has left #wam 13:50:58 RRSAgent, bye 13:50:58 I see 4 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-wam-actions.rdf : 13:50:58 ACTION: marcos create an Implementation Report doc for the VMMF spec [1] 13:50:58 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-wam-irc#T13-26-55 13:50:58 ACTION: robin notify ArtB when the VMMF is ready for a TransReq [2] 13:50:58 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-wam-irc#T13-27-11 13:50:58 ACTION: barstow work with StevenP to schedule a Candidate call with the Director [3] 13:50:58 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-wam-irc#T13-27-36 13:50:58 ACTION: barstow work with StevenP on the logisitics of two CRs during the same Director's call [4] 13:50:58 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-wam-irc#T13-45-05