IRC log of agile on 2012-10-31
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 12:36:38 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #agile
- 12:36:38 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/10/31-agile-irc
- 12:36:50 [annevk]
- Steve: W3C Process Agility
- 12:37:02 [annevk]
- Steve: specification development sometimes took a long time. Was the Process a problem?
- 12:37:21 [annevk]
- Steve: we got in the order of 27 proposals, filtered down to 12 discussed in May
- 12:37:32 [annevk]
- Steve: I'm here to report on the actions the AB thought appropriate
- 12:37:45 [hsivonen]
- hsivonen has joined #agile
- 12:37:53 [annevk]
- Steve: We found the Process was not most of the problem
- 12:38:08 [annevk]
- Steve: methods could be implemented within the Process to make things more workable
- 12:38:23 [annevk]
- Topic: Proposed Process Changes
- 12:38:51 [annevk]
- Steve: Consider testing early in the process would be appropriate.
- 12:39:12 [annevk]
- Steve: The Process is mostly for new people. To let them know what to think about what it takes to get to REC
- 12:39:49 [annevk]
- Steve: tests are not the only way to show things are interoperable. Showing a feature is implemented in multiple implementations and the bug log on those features is reasonable is another way of demonstrating.
- 12:39:54 [dbaron]
- dbaron has joined #agile
- 12:39:58 [annevk]
- Steve: the HTML WG might use that
- 12:40:21 [annevk]
- ... There were a couple of things that seemed to be artificial restrictions that made things more complicated than necessary
- 12:40:49 [annevk]
- ... The PR step caused delay and caused confusion with respect to referencing.
- 12:41:01 [annevk]
- ... The idea is to clarify that a CR is pretty damn close to REC
- 12:41:28 [annevk]
- ... CR is not perfect, but the final tune up to REC is painful and should be less
- 12:41:34 [annevk]
- ... painful
- 12:42:02 [annevk]
- ... Questions?
- 12:42:18 [annevk]
- ... and feedback? Is this adequate?
- 12:42:24 [koalie]
- koalie has joined #agile
- 12:42:46 [annevk]
- dbaron: The CSS WG has the tendency bounce in and out of CR a lot
- 12:43:00 [annevk]
- dbaron: it seems inconvenient to have the AC vote multiple times at CR
- 12:43:31 [annevk]
- Steve: The proposal is the AC would vote once
- 12:43:58 [annevk]
- Steve: with allowance for a requested vote on re-entry if felt necessary
- 12:45:05 [annevk]
- David Filip: The testing recommendation is vague. I wonder if it should be normatively required?
- 12:45:09 [cygri]
- cygri has joined #agile
- 12:45:20 [annevk]
- Steve: what is required is at LC that the WG documents their approach.
- 12:45:29 [annevk]
- ... and at CR they establish a plan
- 12:45:39 [annevk]
- ... they are at those points not required to have tests
- 12:46:09 [annevk]
- Steve: we want to encourage testing early, but we do not want to require it
- 12:46:26 [annevk]
- Topic: Practices for Agility
- 12:46:46 [annevk]
- Steve: A barrier to getting to LC is resolving dependencies with other WGs
- 12:47:02 [annevk]
- ... the idea is to identify those during chartering
- 12:47:18 [annevk]
- ... FPWDs are perhaps better developed in CGs
- 12:47:53 [tpacbot]
- tpacbot has joined #agile
- 12:47:56 [annevk]
- ... The W3C has four important events: FPWD (initial patent commitment), LC (more patents), CR (is done), REC (actually done)
- 12:48:07 [annevk]
- ... We want to focus on those points as they seem to be gating things
- 12:48:51 [annevk]
- ... We are working on making Editor Drafts (EDs) more discoverable
- 12:48:55 [tpacbot]
- tpacbot has joined #agile
- 12:49:10 [annevk]
- David Filip: if someone recharters between LC and something else?
- 12:49:13 [annevk]
- Steve: should not matter
- 12:49:21 [annevk]
- Steve: patents are attached to documents, not the charter
- 12:49:39 [jcverdie]
- jcverdie has joined #agile
- 12:50:45 [annevk]
- Mike: About making chartering more agile. Using a CG to produce a draft or starting with a SUBMISSION is better. Open ended discussion is painful.
- 12:51:00 [annevk]
- s/Mike:/Mike Champion:/
- 12:51:12 [annevk]
- Steve: yes, that would avoid laywering and allow for technical discussion
- 12:51:26 [annevk]
- Steve: documents have multiple audiences
- 12:51:36 [annevk]
- Steve: implementors want latest; reviewers might want latest
- 12:51:51 [annevk]
- Steve: TR/ only gives snapshots; make the EDs more accessible
- 12:52:03 [annevk]
- ... by linking them from TR/
- 12:52:36 [annevk]
- Mike Champion: does it matter where they are published?
- 12:52:53 [jeff]
- jeff has joined #agile
- 12:52:57 [annevk]
- Steve: The Google/Bing result is terrible for non-TR/ links
- 12:53:25 [annevk]
- dbaron: New engineers at browsers have implemented old versions of a spec
- 12:54:39 [annevk]
- Steve: if you do testing early, you get specifications adopted faster
- 12:55:16 [annevk]
- ... specification editors seem to appreciate this more as well as tests help them guide their writing and understanding
- 12:56:28 [dbaron]
- Steve shows http://test.csswg.org/annotations/css21/
- 12:56:54 [plinss]
- plinss has joined #agile
- 12:57:04 [jalvinen]
- jalvinen has joined #agile
- 12:57:28 [annevk]
- Steve: The CSS WG has an annotated version of CSS 2.1 that identifies the tests for it
- 12:57:57 [annevk]
- Steve: and allows running to run tests for the browser used
- 12:58:23 [annevk]
- ... it has section-by-section information as well
- 12:59:11 [annevk]
- Steve: this is an example of integrating testing
- 12:59:30 [annevk]
- Steve: as well as tests, integrating issues would be good too
- 12:59:44 [jeff]
- jeff has joined #agile
- 13:01:09 [annevk]
- Steve: both WebApps and CSS develop small specifications
- 13:01:11 [jeff]
- jeff has joined #agile
- 13:01:22 [annevk]
- Steve: modularizing also creates problems
- 13:01:28 [annevk]
- Steve: such as making sure it's coherent
- 13:01:50 [annevk]
- Topic: Are Supergroups the Solution or the Problem[?]
- 13:02:04 [annevk]
- Steve: HTML, CSS, and WebApps are supergroups
- 13:02:12 [annevk]
- Steve: patent commitment is made to the WG
- 13:02:30 [annevk]
- Steve: protection is for all IPR of the WG
- 13:03:05 [annevk]
- dbaron: I think the common case is that a Member refuses to grant IPR for a small work item
- 13:03:48 [annevk]
- Steve: A perception is that these groups add work faster than they output it
- 13:04:07 [annevk]
- [The scribe missed something above and therefore what dbaron said does not quite make sense in the context of the minutes. Apologies.]
- 13:04:17 [jeff]
- jeff has joined #agile
- 13:04:50 [dbaron]
- What Steve said before was talk about small group spinoffs, and mention a motivation being that somebody whose input was important refused to join the supergroup for IPR reasons
- 13:04:56 [annevk]
- Steve: Large groups create problems for AC review and there's a question about whether or not process is being made.
- 13:05:11 [annevk]
- Topic: The Impact of the Paten[t] Policy
- 13:05:58 [MichaelC_]
- q+ to relate managing issues with modularization, supergroups vs group spawning, and charter agility
- 13:06:01 [annevk]
- Steve: The Patent Policy (PP) is not the problem.
- 13:06:26 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #agile
- 13:06:26 [annevk]
- Topic: What is the AB Missing?
- 13:07:14 [annevk]
- Michael Cooper: I see the case for modularization, but it can be difficult to manage. The PFWG has a large problem with reviewing the incoming work.
- 13:07:25 [annevk]
- Michael Cooper: The PFWG gets blown away by the snowball
- 13:08:05 [annevk]
- Michael Cooper: The more you modularize the more you make it difficult to separate out IPR concerns. The opposite is group spawning, but then you miss having everyone in the same room for closely related specifications.
- 13:08:36 [annevk]
- ... The charter has little wiggle room
- 13:09:00 [annevk]
- ... The charter is too formal as it's likely to change in response to concerns
- 13:09:23 [annevk]
- Mike Champion: The PP drives these suboptimal things
- 13:09:53 [annevk]
- ... making it applicable to a specification rather than WG might make things more tangible
- 13:10:41 [annevk]
- Steve: Maybe supergroups should give some kinds of heads up? [Did I get that right?]
- 13:10:54 [annevk]
- Michael Coopier: We'd need to not miss those LCs then
- 13:11:20 [annevk]
- Steve: I'm trying to see if there's a mechanism that works for both sides. I think it's important for WGs to have interaction with other WGs; either scheduled or unscheduled
- 13:12:00 [annevk]
- Daniel Glazman: The HyperText Coordination Group is mostly useless. It's difficult to find the reasons why, but it does not work well.
- 13:12:27 [annevk]
- Daniel Glazman: Make status reports and participation mandatory
- 13:12:57 [annevk]
- [The scribe thinks that forcing people to do boring things is not going to work.]
- 13:13:22 [annevk]
- Steve: We've been thinking about a notion of dashboards, to coordinate these kind of things
- 13:13:31 [annevk]
- Daniel Glazman: They're not intrusive enough
- 13:13:50 [annevk]
- Daniel Glazman: Email you're almost forced to read
- 13:14:05 [annevk]
- [Scribe actively filters his email...]
- 13:14:42 [annevk]
- s/Coopier/Cooper/
- 13:15:24 [annevk]
- Michael Cooper: The audience of who needs reviews needs to be public; important to get public engagement
- 13:15:56 [annevk]
- David Baron: I took something different from what Daniel was saying than what he meant.
- 13:16:42 [annevk]
- David Baron: The HyperText Coordination Groups (HGCs) does not work well because you pass information via liason and that does not work well
- 13:16:54 [annevk]
- s/liason/liaison/
- 13:17:18 [annevk]
- Steve: An advantage of the HCG is that it is tracked
- 13:17:32 [annevk]
- Henri Sivonen: I think one of the bugs with the HCG is that it's Member-confidential
- 13:17:40 [annevk]
- David Baron: I think it's public now
- 13:17:52 [annevk]
- [Multiple people confirm it's public.]
- 13:18:18 [annevk]
- [Secret stuff is being said. I guess you had to be here.]
- 13:18:49 [annevk]
- Steve: The secret stuff is a problem of the past.
- 13:19:15 [annevk]
- Steve: I'd like to thank you all for your time
- 13:19:32 [annevk]
- Michael Cooper: What is going to happen with the output here?
- 13:19:48 [annevk]
- Steve: The AB is represented by three people here and the AC will look at this as well
- 13:19:52 [annevk]
- Steve: it will not on the floor
- 13:19:59 [annevk]
- RRSAgent, make minutes
- 13:19:59 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/31-agile-minutes.html annevk
- 13:20:11 [annevk]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 13:23:31 [yoshiaki]
- yoshiaki has joined #agile
- 13:24:22 [jalvinen]
- jalvinen has left #agile
- 13:25:36 [tantek]
- tantek has joined #agile
- 13:29:45 [MichaelC_]
- MichaelC_ has joined #agile
- 13:30:03 [MichaelC_]
- MichaelC_ has left #agile
- 13:32:37 [cygri]
- cygri has joined #agile
- 13:32:55 [cygri]
- cygri has left #agile
- 13:33:01 [koalie]
- koalie has left #agile
- 13:39:29 [yoshiaki]
- yoshiaki has joined #agile
- 13:46:18 [jeff]
- jeff has joined #agile
- 14:07:07 [tantek]
- tantek has joined #agile
- 14:19:32 [tantek]
- tantek has joined #agile
- 14:28:45 [yoshiaki]
- yoshiaki has joined #agile
- 14:43:52 [annevk]
- annevk has left #agile
- 14:45:22 [jeff]
- jeff has joined #agile
- 14:57:09 [yoshiaki]
- yoshiaki has joined #agile
- 15:11:31 [tantek]
- tantek has joined #agile
- 15:24:59 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #agile
- 15:30:08 [ted]
- ted has left #agile
- 15:50:47 [jeff]
- jeff has joined #agile
- 15:55:02 [yoshiaki]
- yoshiaki has joined #agile
- 16:08:31 [yoshiaki]
- yoshiaki has joined #agile
- 16:40:52 [yoshiaki]
- yoshiaki has joined #agile
- 17:21:25 [tpacbot]
- tpacbot has joined #agile