13:23:47 RRSAgent has joined #dap 13:23:47 logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/07/07-dap-irc 13:23:49 RRSAgent, make logs world 13:23:49 Zakim has joined #dap 13:23:51 Zakim, this will be DAP 13:23:51 ok, trackbot; I see UW_DAP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 37 minutes 13:23:52 Meeting: Device APIs and Policy Working Group Teleconference 13:23:52 Date: 07 July 2010 13:24:44 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Jul/0031.html 13:43:23 Fan_HU has joined #dap 13:52:04 darobin has joined #dap 13:54:12 UW_DAP()10:00AM has now started 13:54:19 + +1.650.335.aaaa 13:55:40 AnssiK has joined #dap 13:56:33 burn has joined #dap 13:56:42 Chair: Robin_Berjon, Frederick_Hirsch 13:56:44 RRSAgent, pointer? 13:56:44 See http://www.w3.org/2010/07/07-dap-irc#T13-56-44 13:56:53 Present+ Robin_Berjon, Frederick_Hirsch 13:57:19 +[Voxeo] 13:57:23 if I stop talking at some point, it'll be because I've passed out from the heat :) 13:58:29 nstratford: welcome to the group! it'd be nice if you could introduce yourself a little at the beginning of the call 13:58:51 Regrets+ Laura_Arribas, Marco_Marengo, Niklas_Widell 13:58:58 Present+ James_Salsman 13:59:09 Present+ Dan_Burnett 13:59:25 + +44.135.388.aabb 13:59:45 zakim, Voxeo is Dan_Burnett,Neil_Stratford 13:59:45 +Dan_Burnett,Neil_Stratford; got it 13:59:45 Present+ Neil_Stratford 13:59:46 +[IPcaller] 13:59:52 zakim, [IPcaller] is me 13:59:52 +fjh; got it 13:59:57 +[IPcaller] 14:00:00 +ilkka 14:00:04 Zakim, [IPCaller] is me 14:00:04 +darobin; got it 14:00:15 zakim, who is here? 14:00:15 On the phone I see +1.650.335.aaaa, Dan_Burnett,Neil_Stratford, +44.135.388.aabb, fjh, darobin, ilkka 14:00:18 On IRC I see burn, AnssiK, darobin, Zakim, RRSAgent, nstratford, wmaslowski, fjh, tlr, shepazu, Marcos, lgombos, trackbot, dom, ilkka, ingmar 14:00:19 zakim, aabb is nstratford 14:00:19 +nstratford; got it 14:00:25 zakim, Dan_Burnett,Neil_Stratford is Dan_Burnett 14:00:25 +Dan_Burnett; got it 14:00:30 Present+ Ilkka_Oksanen 14:00:51 + +1.202.436.aacc 14:00:53 Present+ James_ Salsman 14:00:56 +AnssiK 14:01:00 Present+ Anssi_Kostiainen 14:01:02 zakim, who is here? 14:01:02 On the phone I see +1.650.335.aaaa, Dan_Burnett, nstratford, fjh, darobin, ilkka, +1.202.436.aacc, AnssiK 14:01:04 On IRC I see burn, AnssiK, darobin, Zakim, RRSAgent, nstratford, wmaslowski, fjh, tlr, shepazu, Marcos, lgombos, trackbot, dom, ilkka, ingmar 14:01:07 Suresh has joined #dap 14:01:13 zakim, Dan_Burnett is me 14:01:13 +burn; got it 14:01:19 Present+ Suresh_Chitturi 14:01:22 +??P20 14:01:23 paddy has joined #dap 14:01:24 alissa has joined #dap 14:01:35 zakim, ??P20 is probably me 14:01:35 +dom?; got it 14:01:40 zakim, mute me 14:01:40 dom? should now be muted 14:01:42 Present+ Alissa_Cooper 14:01:48 enewland has joined #dap 14:02:00 p+ erica_newland 14:02:00 zakim, +1.202.436.aacc is alissa 14:02:00 +alissa; got it 14:02:10 Present+ Dominique_Hazael-Massieux 14:02:11 zakim, who is here? 14:02:11 On the phone I see +1.650.335.aaaa, burn, nstratford, fjh, darobin, ilkka, alissa, AnssiK, dom? (muted) 14:02:13 On IRC I see enewland, alissa, paddy, Suresh, burn, AnssiK, darobin, Zakim, RRSAgent, nstratford, wmaslowski, fjh, tlr, shepazu, Marcos, lgombos, trackbot, dom, ilkka, ingmar 14:02:22 Present+ Erica_Newland 14:02:23 present+ erica_newland 14:02:29 jmorris has joined #dap 14:02:33 +jmorris 14:02:35 + +1.972.373.aadd 14:02:40 zakim, aaaa salsman 14:02:40 I don't understand 'aaaa salsman', fjh 14:02:46 zakim, aaaa is James_Salsman 14:02:46 +James_Salsman; got it 14:02:53 Present+ John_Morris 14:02:56 zakim, aadd is Suresh 14:02:56 +Suresh; got it 14:02:56 Present+ James_Salsman 14:03:12 zakim, who is here? 14:03:12 On the phone I see James_Salsman, burn, nstratford, fjh, darobin, ilkka, alissa, AnssiK, dom? (muted), jmorris, Suresh 14:03:14 On IRC I see jmorris, enewland, alissa, paddy, Suresh, burn, AnssiK, darobin, Zakim, RRSAgent, nstratford, wmaslowski, fjh, tlr, shepazu, Marcos, lgombos, trackbot, dom, ilkka, 14:03:16 ... ingmar 14:03:27 + +1.301.581.aaee 14:03:40 zakim, aaee is jmorris 14:03:40 +jmorris; got it 14:03:43 zakim, who is here? 14:03:43 On the phone I see James_Salsman, burn, nstratford, fjh, darobin, ilkka, alissa, AnssiK, dom? (muted), jmorris, Suresh, jmorris.a 14:03:46 On IRC I see jmorris, enewland, alissa, paddy, Suresh, burn, AnssiK, darobin, Zakim, RRSAgent, nstratford, wmaslowski, fjh, tlr, shepazu, Marcos, lgombos, trackbot, dom, ilkka, 14:03:49 ... ingmar 14:03:49 +??P25 14:03:52 zakim, jmorris is enewland 14:03:52 +enewland; got it 14:03:58 maoteo has joined #dap 14:04:04 zakim, who is here? 14:04:04 On the phone I see James_Salsman, burn, nstratford, fjh, darobin, ilkka, alissa, AnssiK, dom? (muted), enewland, Suresh, jmorris.a, ??P25 14:04:06 zakim, ??P25 is paddy 14:04:07 On IRC I see maoteo, jmorris, enewland, alissa, paddy, Suresh, burn, AnssiK, darobin, Zakim, RRSAgent, nstratford, wmaslowski, fjh, tlr, shepazu, Marcos, lgombos, trackbot, dom, 14:04:10 ... ilkka, ingmar 14:04:10 +paddy; got it 14:04:17 present+ Paddy_Byers 14:04:31 Present+ Maria_Oteo 14:04:47 Scribe: Paddy 14:04:50 zakim, who is here? 14:04:50 On the phone I see James_Salsman, burn, nstratford, fjh, darobin, ilkka, alissa, AnssiK, dom? (muted), enewland, Suresh, jmorris.a, paddy 14:04:52 On IRC I see maoteo, jmorris, enewland, alissa, paddy, Suresh, burn, AnssiK, darobin, Zakim, RRSAgent, nstratford, wmaslowski, fjh, tlr, shepazu, Marcos, lgombos, trackbot, dom, 14:04:53 ScribeNick: paddy 14:04:55 ... ilkka, ingmar 14:05:11 scribenick:paddy 14:05:47 + +49.133.7.aaff 14:05:48 richt has joined #dap 14:05:57 james question - initial configuration vs remote management 14:06:23 +richt 14:06:30 Present+ Richard_Tibbett 14:06:52 zakim, who is here 14:06:52 maoteo, you need to end that query with '?' 14:07:01 zakim, who is here? 14:07:01 On the phone I see James_Salsman, burn, nstratford, fjh, darobin, ilkka, alissa, AnssiK, dom? (muted), enewland, Suresh, jmorris.a, paddy, +49.133.7.aaff, richt 14:07:05 On IRC I see richt, maoteo, jmorris, enewland, alissa, paddy, Suresh, burn, AnssiK, darobin, Zakim, RRSAgent, nstratford, wmaslowski, fjh, tlr, shepazu, Marcos, lgombos, trackbot, 14:07:14 ... dom, ilkka, ingmar 14:07:23 Zakim, aaff is maoteo 14:07:23 +maoteo; got it 14:07:29 fjh: I sent out a draft agenda for the F2F. 14:07:36 .. the F2F will be next week 14:07:43 q+ 14:07:45 .. We have had logistics issues with the size of the room 14:07:48 ack me 14:07:56 ... so far I think all latecomers have been accommodated 14:07:58 -> http://www.w3.org/mid/1C510657-258D-48B8-A2BB-D8A71D693CAF@nokia.com F2F agenda draft 14:08:07 ... if you think you're coming, pls make sure Dom knows 14:08:16 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Jul/0042.html 14:08:21 dom: you absolutely need to be registered if you're coming 14:08:31 danielcoloma has joined #dap 14:08:31 please indicate if you have any comment or suggestions on the agenda 14:08:36 .. we are again fitting in the maximum number that we can accommodate 14:08:49 zakim, mute me 14:08:49 dom? should now be muted 14:08:52 logistics page http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/wiki/LondonF2F2010 14:08:54 fjh: logistics page is up 14:09:05 ... I think this has all the details you need 14:09:21 ... Anything else to say abotu F2F? 14:09:33 .. the timing: it is Weds-Fri 14:09:49 .. different times each day so check the agenda 14:10:11 Topic: Minutes approval from 30 June 14:10:14 http://www.w3.org/mid/503B5689-741F-437E-AE13-8E613ECCE84F@nokia.com 14:10:29 RESOLUTION: Minutes from 30 June approved 14:10:38 Topic: Policy 14:10:39 Present+ Daniel_Coloma 14:10:47 fjh: Just sent a reply to Dom to the list 14:10:54 q+ 14:11:06 .. I understand where you're coming from but wonder if we are just going to reinvent XACML 14:11:17 .. I guess you've suggested a couple of things in your email 14:11:18 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Jul/0048.html Dom's reply to FJH's reply 14:11:34 ... then go from there, eg try to incrementally invent WARP 14:11:37 zakim, call thomas-781 14:11:37 ok, tlr; the call is being made 14:11:38 +Thomas 14:11:43 zakim, I am thomas 14:11:43 ok, tlr, I now associate you with Thomas 14:11:44 zakim, mute me 14:11:44 Thomas should now be muted 14:11:48 .. but I think these things are so different 14:12:02 .. on the other hand, we already have contributions that address these issues 14:12:11 .. perhaps we have more of a model than we think we do 14:13:42 paddy: in BONDI tried to do something simple but ended up with XACML to avoid reinventing the wheel 14:13:55 q? 14:14:02 fjh: as soon as there is any complexity, you will end up with something similar 14:14:03 ack me 14:14:03 ack dom 14:14:15 dom: I agree, I replied to the message with clarifications 14:14:39 .. waht i meant by suggestio n to extend WARP wasn't intended to substitute for policy framework 14:14:48 ... but instead to address another part of the problem 14:15:09 ... ie the part where authors declare what they want to do 14:15:28 .. now, having looked more closely at WARP and how it is used for widgets 14:15:47 ... I don't think that the framework we have fits very well with the kinds of restrictions we might want to impose 14:15:58 .. .eg restrictions that are specific to the way an API works 14:16:14 ... so I think we need to look at a representative sample of APIs 14:16:26 ... before we can know whether or not the model is applicable 14:16:39 .. but not questioning whether or not XACML is the might model approach 14:17:00 ...still not convinced that we understand the space of restrictions well enough 14:17:21 ... one of the things I sought to do in my reply is to take an action to look are one or two APIs more closely 14:17:24 q+ 14:17:26 ... as exemplars 14:17:45 Marcos has joined #dap 14:17:57 fjh: I think what you're saying is that it is hard to link the abstract model to actual APIs 14:18:01 .. and I agree with this 14:18:12 ACTION: Dom to document a couple of APIs restrictions and see how it impacts policy work 14:18:12 Created ACTION-205 - Document a couple of APIs restrictions and see how it impacts policy work [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2010-07-14]. 14:18:19 ... I will read the mail more carefully 14:18:39 ... anyone else can help? 14:19:03 ... also, is someone in a position to be able to approach the browser aspects as well? 14:19:08 zakim, mute me 14:19:08 dom? should now be muted 14:19:19 James: I would like to review all of the APIs from a consumer perspective 14:19:31 .. and look at the privacy and policy implications of all of their interactions 14:19:55 fjh: we started to look at privacy already, but if you could look at policy especially that would be good 14:20:09 James: what aspects, other than privacy, do we wish to control? 14:20:27 fjh: Well there are several concerns addressed by access control 14:20:39 .. there may be external control for various business reasons 14:20:44 .. as well as user-driven control 14:20:57 ... avoidance of prompts is one aspect 14:21:11 James: I would like to see something based on initial configuration 14:21:22 .. I don't think that's incompatible with user-selectable preferences 14:21:32 .. I would be happy to look through all the APIs with this in mind 14:21:37 +Ingmar_Kliche 14:22:03 fjh: I think the issue is how to convert concepts into something concrete, usable, deployable, yet not too simpistic 14:22:15 .. if you could do that, and send to list, that would be great 14:22:27 .. I don't have much more to say 14:22:35 darobin: don't have much to add 14:22:54 ... but if we are looking at usage situations for widgets then we should look at 14:23:03 ack suresh 14:23:07 q? 14:23:16 Suresh: a couple of observations 14:23:22 -richt 14:23:29 .. for WARP, we think it is designed for widget authors to declare their intent 14:23:37 richt has joined #dap 14:23:39 .. .however element is exactly that 14:23:51 ... but talks about policy-based access 14:23:52 need for review and applicability of feature and access elements as currently defined 14:24:03 +richt 14:24:08 ... eg the spec says that in the default policy the UI must deny access 14:24:26 .. so I think it is specified in-between author's intent and actual policy 14:24:41 present+ Ingmar_Kliche 14:24:42 ... so I see some correlation but maybe not usable for our purposes as-is 14:25:02 ... when I look at the policy framework I see three variables: 14:25:25 ... what I think would be interesting would be to see if we can come up with a schema like config.xml in Widgets 14:25:32 q+ remind of xacml 14:25:45 ... perhaps we could come up with a simple expression language 14:26:16 ... if we add some attribute for environments to config.xml would that be enough? 14:26:47 ... I would like to see how far we can do by extending what was done in Widgets 14:27:00 fjh: I think the XACML model alread applies to what you are talking about 14:27:14 .. so it is a question of tying the abstract model to the concrete things we do 14:27:25 .. I don't think we need to rework the model itself 14:27:40 .. I'm against having a separate but "equivalent" language 14:28:07 suresh: just looking on the face of it we should be able to come up with something simpler 14:28:28 fjh: we have a list of abuse cases but not enough "use cases" 14:28:34 q+ 14:28:40 q- 14:28:41 ack paddy 14:29:35 paddy notes confusion between parties, e.g. WARP sites to request access, default deny, if request, get it by default., access element. 14:30:02 paddy notes runtime should be also able to use policy determined by someone other than web site author, to manage access 14:30:35 suresh asks who whether author is policy writer 14:31:01 paddy responds that this is noted in the BONDI uses, various roles and process 14:31:08 s/uses/use cases 14:31:51 (policy wins over the authors intents) 14:33:12 suresh: thanks for the clarification 14:33:28 need to separate author stated intent and runtime policy 14:33:32 ... it looks like do want to separate the author's intent from the runtime policy 14:33:50 fjh: anything anyone else can do before F2F? 14:34:19 .. I will take a look again at the BONDI docs 14:34:45 fjh: one other discussion relating to permissions API 14:34:54 .. but lets leave that discussion to the list 14:35:01 Topic: APIs 14:35:16 darobin: I was hope to close the last ongoing issues with sysinfo 14:35:31 .. but we don't have Bryan and I'm reluctant to make decisions in his absence 14:35:50 James: I have a serious disagreement about some of this 14:36:05 ... I think there are seious privacy implications and implications on us as engineers 14:36:19 ACTION-204? 14:36:19 ACTION-204 -- Robin Berjon to step into the Bryan/James thread in the hope of helping find consensus -- due 2010-07-07 -- OPEN 14:36:19 http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/actions/204 14:36:27 close ACTION-204 14:36:27 ACTION-204 Step into the Bryan/James thread in the hope of helping find consensus closed 14:36:34 .. so where is the line between the information needed that customers will expect versus privacy 14:36:57 ... customers and consumers will expect that corporations adhere to thie expectations wrt privacy 14:37:13 .. the line between privacy concerns and database schema is an extrmely blurry line 14:37:32 darobin: I don't think there is a dispute about whether or not these issues exist 14:37:34 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Jul/0019.html James' list of information he wants added in Network interface 14:37:52 .. but the issue is whether or not we address them in these fields in sysinfo 14:38:02 James: I didn't expect it to come up here either 14:38:23 q+ to suggest this is not something that device typically provides info on 14:38:24 .. I guess I can say positively that AT&T do not degrade DNS quality 14:38:29 q+ 14:38:41 .. they don't actually return invalid database results 14:38:51 .. but some companies are know to do this 14:38:59 well, what can we do about that at the API level? 14:39:02 .. that's the kind of esoteric issue we can't deal with 14:39:08 q+ 14:39:18 q+ 14:39:20 ack me 14:39:21 dom, you wanted to suggest this is not something that device typically provides info on 14:39:22 .. but issues as to whether or not DNS is accurate is an issue that we can deal with, and seems to me to be necessary 14:39:33 ack dom 14:39:34 .. if it's not necessary then I'd like to hear why 14:39:55 dom: I don't think the question is whether it is important or not 14:40:04 .. but I don't think the information is available from the device 14:40:20 .. so we wouldn't necessarily expose it through a device API 14:40:28 .. I think it is clearly out of scope 14:40:48 ... so sysinfo seems to be pretty much finished based on info you can get from the device 14:41:05 James: ifconfig output would give you the information needed to determine bandwith 14:41:23 .. similarly you could determine whether or not certain DNS requests are resolved 14:41:30 dom: but these are network info issues 14:41:46 zakim, mute me 14:41:46 dom? should now be muted 14:41:55 James: but a network device is just another kind of system device 14:42:03 ack fjh 14:42:07 darobin: I think it is too low level 14:42:17 fjh: I'd like to ask 2 things: 14:42:34 ... first, bandwidth is there as a property so isn't this already addressed? 14:42:48 ... second, we have already been discussing privacy extensively 14:42:57 ack thomas 14:43:04 ack thomas 14:43:04 .. this has already been pruned to keep it simple, and the most important info only 14:43:08 .. it could be refined later 14:43:16 thomas: take the DNS thing as an example 14:43:29 ... there are other organisations that deal with this sort of thing 14:43:39 .. and make very clear statements about what is expected of DNS 14:43:40 s/and the most important info only/ 14:43:59 ... there is a large ecosystem of politics, business etc about that 14:44:16 ... also issues relating to whether or not you can do peer-to-peer for example 14:44:26 s/simple,/simple, and bandwidth appears to be listed. may need extensibility/ 14:44:35 .. the way a lot of those sort of politics work out is that people look for win-win situations 14:44:50 .. and this requires all relevant parties to be at the table 14:45:00 ... such as the network operations divisions of companies 14:45:21 .. and getting to a real win-win is more than just creating a javascript API 14:45:45 .. so since we can't do that I suggest that we keep our own task to just defining the API 14:45:56 zakim, mtue me 14:45:56 I don't understand 'mtue me', tlr 14:45:58 ack jmorris 14:45:59 zakim, mute me 14:45:59 Thomas should now be muted 14:46:08 ... that is not intended to understate the importance of what you're raising 14:46:15 jmorris: I agree with thomas 14:46:39 ... making these issues a precondition to defining an API seems like it will just stall us 14:46:50 .. but we should think about how to address it in other fora 14:46:59 .. to get networks to be as transparent as possible 14:47:11 .. once that happens, we can think about how to expose that info to a web applciation 14:47:23 james: where do you draw the line: eg bandwidth? 14:47:32 +1 to John 14:47:43 jmorris: we've limiting it to things we can reasonably expect a device to know 14:47:56 .. we do not generally have access to this information right now 14:48:25 .. but I think right now there is no common datapoint whereby a device can discover the privacy policy of its network 14:48:41 james: I think most of the issues a device can figure out does not include the privacy policy 14:48:52 .. I think we can make progress on it after the privacy F2F 14:48:53 should we add to document note that the items are those that the device can figure out itself? 14:49:03 .. and a format is needed to be able to express such policies 14:49:20 .. since then networks will be able to see how they can be measured 14:49:33 ... instead of meing measured just on their marketing capability 14:49:39 q+ 14:49:47 .. and the possibilities should not be dismissed lightly 14:49:47 s/meing/being/ 14:49:58 ack jmorris 14:50:06 darobin: you are preaching to the choir here 14:50:19 jmorris: I agree it would be great to discuss outside of DAP 14:50:39 james: I have to ask: where is the right place to address this? 14:51:04 darobin: I think the W3C staff can help us understand the right place to address this? 14:51:21 ... on sysinfo is we assume that the current issue is moved out of scope 14:51:48 .. then are we nearing publishability? Shall we go to CfC or wait for Bryans' input? 14:52:05 james: I'd like to ask that the decision is delayed until after the privacy workshop 14:52:22 q+ 14:52:23 darobin: it would be after the w'shop anyway because there is a 1 week comment period 14:52:24 ack me 14:52:27 Agree with jmorris. I think we should also delay the decision until after the F2F...still a lot for Bryan to respond to 14:52:34 darobin: any objection to CfC? 14:52:46 dom: I object, based on the upcoming w'shop and F2F 14:52:55 ... which will limit the time available for thorough review 14:53:05 .. personally I will not have time to review 14:53:17 .. I will not formally object but I would rather not 14:53:24 PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Two weeks CfC on SysInfo LC 14:53:29 darobin: would it be OK to say the CfC period is 2 weeks? 14:53:32 +1 to two weeks 14:53:32 yep, two weeks would be good as Dom said. 14:53:44 zakim, mute me 14:53:44 dom? should now be muted 14:53:55 fjh: remember there probably won't be a meeting in 2 weeks 14:54:05 darobin: we can decide by email 14:54:24 -Thomas 14:54:40 RESOLUTION: Two weeks CfC on SysInfo LC 14:55:05 Topic: Contacts 14:55:15 richt: want to talk about DOM integation of the contacts API 14:55:24 .. as discussed on the email 14:55:47 ... so unifying what you can do via a non-form-based control as well as by programmtic means 14:55:47 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Jul/0026.html 14:56:18 ... key question is where would the work be done? bearing in mind how close this is to the discussion in HTML5? 14:56:29 .. should the two groups work together? 14:56:36 s/programmtic/programmatic/ 14:56:43 darobin: we can definitely do work on this and coordinate if there is interest 14:57:06 risht: the same discussion relates to other areas 14:57:18 ... and there are interesting topics to discuss between the groups 14:57:51 .. the same issue arises with MediaCapture 14:57:51 q+ 14:57:56 ack Suresh 14:58:05 suresh: just a question for richt for clarification: 14:58:28 ... can you clarify what is the advantage of this approach, and does it have the same power as the JavaScript approach? 14:58:57 .. you can get access to the contact list but do you have the same functionality you would have from JavaScript? 14:59:19 q+ to ask about formally bringing in DAP, and to suggest keeping contacts API as is for now 14:59:21 richt: you can get the objects by declarative means, but then use the objects via JavaScript in the same way 14:59:31 [+1 to Dom] 15:00:01 .. you can use the JavaScript API to do the same operations 15:00:05 q? 15:00:21 suresh: we have this service.contacts to get access to the contacts object 15:00:21 ack dom 15:00:26