Independent User Interface Task Force Teleconference

06 Mar 2013


See also: IRC log


Michael_Cooper, Andy_Heath, Jason_White, Janina_Sajka, jcraig, Rich, Cooper
Rich_Simpson, Ted_O´Connor


<trackbot> Date: 06 March 2013

<janina> Meeting: IndieUI Task Force Teleconference

<scribe> scribe: jcraig

JS: Topic: Editor Update

Editor's Update

<jasonjgw> There's an open issue regarding specs not loading properly in Chrome browsers.

<jasonjgw> Branch oddities have occurred in PF hg repository and may occur if anyone pushes changes without pulling the latest revisions first.

jc: updated specs for Chrome not loading http scripts
... have not been able to update User Context spec yet
... have local edits for additional actions in Events spec; hope to have those in today or tomorrow.
... Make sure, if you're pushing to the Mercurial repo, be sure to pull first, otherwise, we get weird branching problems.


js: Daylight Savings Time is this weekend. Next 4 meetings (8 weeks) are at 21:00 UTC Zulu
... EU and AU times will be different. US times will still be 5pm Eastern, 2pm Pacific

Upcoming Teleconference Time Shifts

js: looking to improve efficiency/productivity of the group email and telecon process

Adjusting Our Fortnightly Process

js: weekly telecon time is one consideration
... trying to avoid the flurry of activity only right before telecons
... will call for agenda earlier, and post a survey of topics (scribe may have missed some details here?)

jw: from experience, when WCAG WG ran surveys, we found it very useful, particularly with controversial items

jc: regular list contributions come with more regular edits; also think the survey and earlier agenda is a good idea.

mc: agreed. trying to stimulate discussion of topics not necessarily tied to spec edits

jc: such as privacy; user expectations of what to share, when, and how.

<jasonjgw> James suggests that the timing of discussions (tending to occur shortly before meetings) is not caused by the bi-weekly meeting arrangements.

mc: checking for issue on privacy; no issues exists

<MichaelC> issue: Privacy in User Context

<trackbot> Created ISSUE-10 - Privacy in User Context; please complete additional details at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/track/issues/10/edit>.

<jasonjgw> He agrees with the survey and agenda proposals.

<MichaelC> trackbot, associate issue-10 with product-3

<trackbot> ISSUE-10 (Privacy in User Context) associated with PRODUCT-3.

<jasonjgw> There are larger topics that could productively be discussed on list, e.g., privacy issues raised by User Contexts.

js: no objection to earlier agenda and use of surveys to organize meeting efficiency

<jasonjgw> Discussion of grounding this topic in open issues on the issue list.

js: i will call for agenda items on wednesday or thursday of week prior to call

jw: surveys tend to be most useful with existing controversies

mc: will also open survey items to other suggestions

RESOLUTION: Janina and Michael will try the early agenda and survey approach


Reconsidering Our User Context Process

js: CSUN takeaway is that we need this as soon as possible
... ~ Events module is more concrete. WG understanding of User Context draft is more subjective. Need to coalesce WG opinion.
... need more use cases for User Context module.
... could have an action to clean up the use case wiki, so that the read is not repetitive. Cooper volunteered.

mc: Some requirements were around things like tree controls. e.g. "command to open a tree branch" (expand request)
... some are accessibility requirements PFWG should work on in other technologies.
... in order to more clearly focus the IndieUI work

<jasonjgw> James agrees that use cases need to be collapsed/reorganized as discussed.

<jasonjgw> Some use cases are covered by events not yet in the draft and should be consolidated in the requirements.

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to volunteer to take actions

mc: need to sort and reorg Use Case requirements, and identify related requirements.

jw: Identifying use cases for User Context would help codify WG understanding regarding this module
... seems most useful for cases that are most controversial

js: I don't think they were controversial in that anyone disagreed they were useful, just regarding the technical and UI implementation.

jw: I suggest that some (all?) of the more easily specified prefs are already covered by other specs.

ah: I think all of these are necessary and not covered by existing technologies

js: privacy issues need use cases, for example less private at work or with your bank than with forums, or general sites

<scribe> ACTION: cooper to consolidate use cases [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/03/06-indie-ui-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-42 - Consolidate use cases [on Michael Cooper - due 2013-03-13].

mc: later step will be thinking about which use cases are most relevant to User Context
... first pass of use case cleanup will be about structure more than content

jc: mentioned captions as an example of one that is not fully covered by other technologies, including WebVTT

js: WebVTT is competing with TTML
... CVA will probably go TTML; may have to support both.
... something about key/value pairs?
... to improve efficiency of spec prod, need to also prioritize each use case and feature

mc: andy and rich's proposal included properties and multiple values
... could be more understandable as simpler key/value pairs

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to volunteer to reformat the proposal from Andy / Rich as key value pairs - as a proposed structure only to show how it would look, not comments on content

<MichaelC> ACTION: cooper to reformat the proposal from Andy / Rich as key value pairs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/03/06-indie-ui-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-43 - Reformat the proposal from Andy / Rich as key value pairs [on Michael Cooper - due 2013-03-13].

rs: i like the idea of key/value pairs

ah: will make comments on IRC if call drops out
... can't do inferencing with key value pairs
... discussing inferencing main value versus fallback values or lower priority values

mc: I'll take a pass at showing how that can be done with key/value pairs

js: CSUN consensus "what do we do until we can use IndieUI"

<Zakim> jcraig, you wanted to make sure people are not promoting IndieUI as the spec that will solve everything

jw: web app authors will have to implement

<MichaelC> trackbot, end meeting

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: cooper to consolidate use cases [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/03/06-indie-ui-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: cooper to reformat the proposal from Andy / Rich as key value pairs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/03/06-indie-ui-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.137 (CVS log)
$Date: 2013/03/06 23:16:03 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.137  of Date: 2012/09/20 20:19:01  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/OZ/AU/
Succeeded: s/will/i will/
Succeeded: s/Events was/Events module is/
Succeeded: s/expad/expand/
Succeeded: s/"influencing" with key value pairs?/inferencing with key value pairs/
Found Scribe: jcraig
Inferring ScribeNick: jcraig
Default Present: Michael_Cooper, Andy_Heath, Jason_White, Janina_Sajka, jcraig, Rich, Cooper
Present: Michael_Cooper Andy_Heath Jason_White Janina_Sajka jcraig Rich Cooper
Regrets: Rich_Simpson Ted_O´Connor
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-indie-ui/2013Mar/0000.html
Found Date: 06 Mar 2013
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/03/06-indie-ui-minutes.html
People with action items: cooper

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]