IRC log of dap on 2013-07-24

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:38:52 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #dap

13:38:52 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/07/24-dap-irc

13:38:54 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs world

13:38:54 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #dap

13:38:56 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be DAP

13:38:56 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot; I see UW_DAP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 22 minutes

13:38:57 [trackbot]

Meeting: Device APIs Working Group Teleconference

13:38:57 [trackbot]

Date: 24 July 2013

13:40:31 [fjh]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Jul/0043.html

13:40:51 [fjh]

fjh has changed the topic to: dap 3279; agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Jul/0043.html

13:41:10 [fjh]

Chair: Frederick_Hirsch

13:41:17 [fjh]

Present+ Frederick_Hirsch

13:42:02 [fjh]

Regrets+ Anssi_Kostiainen

13:42:18 [fjh]

Regrets+ Dominique_Hazael-Massieux

13:55:32 [Zakim]

UW_DAP()10:00AM has now started

13:55:39 [Zakim]

+Josh_Soref

13:55:42 [Josh_Soref]

scribe: Josh_Soref

13:58:00 [Zakim]

+[IPcaller]

13:58:12 [fjh]

zakim, [IPcaller] is me

13:58:12 [Zakim]

+fjh; got it

13:58:18 [fjh]

clear

13:58:22 [fjh]

zakim, who is here?

13:58:22 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Josh_Soref, fjh

13:58:23 [Zakim]

On IRC I see RRSAgent, fjh, tobie, trackbot, richt, mounir, Josh_Soref, slightlyoff

13:58:40 [fjh]

s/clear//

13:59:12 [fjh]

zakim, who is here?

13:59:12 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Josh_Soref, fjh

13:59:13 [Zakim]

On IRC I see RRSAgent, fjh, tobie, trackbot, richt, mounir, Josh_Soref, slightlyoff

14:01:10 [gmandyam]

gmandyam has joined #dap

14:01:17 [Zakim]

+ +1.858.651.aaaa

14:01:26 [gmandyam]

Zakim, aaaa is gmandyam\

14:01:26 [Zakim]

+gmandyam\; got it

14:01:37 [gmandyam]

Zakim, aaaa is gmandyam

14:01:37 [Zakim]

sorry, gmandyam, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'

14:02:22 [Josh_Soref]

Zakim, gmandyam\ is really gmandyam

14:02:22 [Zakim]

sorry, Josh_Soref, I do not recognize a party named 'gmandyam\'

14:02:23 [gmandyam]

Frederick, Am at work and they are testing the fire alarm. I am going to stay muted for right now. -Giri

14:02:40 [Josh_Soref]

s/Frederick, Am at work and they are testing the fire alarm. I am going to stay muted for right now. -Giri//

14:05:09 [Cathy]

Cathy has joined #dap

14:06:16 [Josh_Soref]

Zakim, who is here?

14:06:16 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Josh_Soref, fjh, gmandyam

14:06:17 [Zakim]

On IRC I see Cathy, gmandyam, Zakim, RRSAgent, fjh, tobie, trackbot, richt, mounir, Josh_Soref, slightlyoff

14:06:18 [Zakim]

+[IPcaller]

14:06:36 [fjh]

zakim, [IPcaller] is richt

14:06:36 [Zakim]

+richt; got it

14:07:01 [Zakim]

+ +1.781.362.aabb

14:07:06 [Cathy]

zakim, aabb is me

14:07:06 [Zakim]

+Cathy; got it

14:08:13 [Josh_Soref]

RRSAgent, draft minutes

14:08:13 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/07/24-dap-minutes.html Josh_Soref

14:08:34 [Josh_Soref]

RRSAgent, make logs public

14:08:36 [Josh_Soref]

RRSAgent, draft minutes

14:08:36 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/07/24-dap-minutes.html Josh_Soref

14:08:40 [fjh]

Topic: Welcome, agenda review, scribe selection, announcements

14:08:40 [fjh]

2nd CR of Vibration API published, http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/CR-vibration-20130723/

14:08:45 [fjh]

31 July teleconference cancelled

14:08:53 [fjh]

Topic: Minutes approval

14:09:01 [fjh]

Approve minutes from 10 July 2013

14:09:01 [fjh]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Jul/att-0018/minutes-2013-07-10.html

14:09:04 [Josh_Soref]

RESOLUTION: Minutes from 10 July 2013 are approved

14:09:13 [Josh_Soref]

topic: Network Discovery

14:09:24 [fjh]

Editors draft updated to use Promises, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Jul/0036.html

14:09:33 [fjh]

ISSUE-129 : Simplify Network Service Discovery API ;http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/129

14:09:33 [trackbot]

Notes added to ISSUE-129 Simplify Network Service Discovery API.

14:10:06 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: does promises solve this problem?

14:10:21 [Josh_Soref]

Zakim, mute me

14:10:21 [Zakim]

Josh_Soref should now be muted

14:10:26 [fjh]

ISSUE-29?

14:10:26 [trackbot]

ISSUE-29 -- Should DAP APIs support "API Keys" -- closed

14:10:26 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/29

14:10:33 [Josh_Soref]

Cathy: i have some comments on jcd's proposal

14:10:33 [fjh]

ISSUE-129?

14:10:33 [trackbot]

ISSUE-129 -- Simplify Network Service Discovery API -- open

14:10:33 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/129

14:10:43 [Josh_Soref]

... apparently he thinks that's not a problem

14:10:53 [Josh_Soref]

... i don't think we've agreed on whether the approach is an improvement ornot

14:10:55 [Josh_Soref]

s/ornot/or not/

14:11:01 [Josh_Soref]

richt: i looked at the issue

14:11:12 [Josh_Soref]

... i don't think it's getNetworkServices()

14:11:20 [Josh_Soref]

... when new services become available

14:11:27 [Josh_Soref]

... getNetworkServices() could return 0 things

14:11:43 [Josh_Soref]

... he's saying you have to do getNetworkServices() and then onServicesAvailable

14:11:48 [Josh_Soref]

... he's asking if that's unnecessary

14:11:53 [Josh_Soref]

... i think that comes down to implementation

14:12:07 [Josh_Soref]

... i think jcd's viewpoint is that you don't need to wait

14:12:19 [Josh_Soref]

... you don't need to get an empty object and wait for the services

14:12:26 [Josh_Soref]

... i think that's oversimplifying the system

14:12:32 [Josh_Soref]

... you could have 0 or more initially

14:12:35 [Josh_Soref]

... things can come and go

14:12:41 [Josh_Soref]

... the api is designed to handle that UC

14:12:51 [Josh_Soref]

... we've removed complexity where we could

14:12:59 [Josh_Soref]

... we've given flexibility to return 0 or 10 up front

14:13:02 [gmandyam]

q+

14:13:04 [Josh_Soref]

... it's slightly different from promises

14:13:15 [Josh_Soref]

... i think it's unavoidable to get an object and listen to stuff

14:13:23 [Josh_Soref]

... we do that off the return from getNetworkServices()

14:13:31 [Josh_Soref]

... listening for the network is behind the user opt in

14:13:36 [Josh_Soref]

... i think it's correct

14:13:38 [Josh_Soref]

... it's flexible

14:13:48 [Josh_Soref]

... i don't think the work of developers is much larger because of that

14:14:00 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: might be useful if you respond to the thread on the list

14:14:00 [fjh]

ack gmandyam

14:14:13 [Josh_Soref]

gmandyam: richt, it seems onServiceAvailable

14:14:18 [richt_]

richt_ has joined #dap

14:14:20 [Josh_Soref]

... will be invoked multiple times, possibly

14:14:26 [Josh_Soref]

... if the empty object is returned

14:14:30 [Josh_Soref]

... my understanding of Promises

14:14:41 [Josh_Soref]

... is that you really can't apply Promises to a handler

14:14:47 [Josh_Soref]

... that's more than a one-time event handler

14:15:09 [Josh_Soref]

... if this is an issue w/ Network Service Discovery

14:15:17 [Josh_Soref]

... how easy is it tto transition?

14:15:29 [Josh_Soref]

richt: getNetworkServices() is designed to be called once

14:15:40 [Josh_Soref]

... on that, you listen to events for services joining/leaving the network

14:15:52 [Josh_Soref]

... events fire against the return object of the success callback

14:16:14 [Josh_Soref]

... to adjust the services you want, you all getNetworkServices() again to get new events for it

14:16:33 [Josh_Soref]

gmandyam: so, in transitioning to Promises, you aren't getting rid of the event handlers

14:16:46 [Josh_Soref]

richt: the event handlers still exist, they're on the Promise based success object

14:17:31 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: XXX

14:17:37 [Josh_Soref]

richt: YYY

14:17:41 [Josh_Soref]

Cathy: one of the issues

14:17:50 [Josh_Soref]

... when a web app receives a returned object that is empty

14:17:57 [Josh_Soref]

... it could mean different things

14:18:02 [fjh]

fjh: summary - initial return happens once, not always 0 can be 1 or more, then after this initialization, you can get multiple events as services become available or unavailable

14:18:12 [Josh_Soref]

... if the UA returns an empty object, it could be because there are no objects around

14:18:15 [fjh]

s/XXX/thus we should keep the current design and close this issue

14:18:19 [fjh]

s/YYY/right/

14:18:29 [Josh_Soref]

... but another UA could return an empty object because it hasn't started listening to the network

14:18:54 [Josh_Soref]

... this is about how much we want to control how the UA monitors the network

14:19:11 [Josh_Soref]

richt: we could clarify, but we don't want to force how the UA listens to the network

14:19:17 [Josh_Soref]

... it's out of scope

14:19:32 [Josh_Soref]

... it creates some confusion, but you can interpret it however you want, and it will work

14:19:48 [Josh_Soref]

... from a developer point of view, it doesn't change anything

14:19:57 [Josh_Soref]

... you have the same code to handle services

14:20:29 [Josh_Soref]

Topic: Network Service Discovery - Promises

14:20:39 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: we had agreement from people on the list supporting it

14:20:47 [Josh_Soref]

... once we've resolved these issues, we'd want to publish

14:20:58 [Josh_Soref]

... i don't think we want to go around in circles

14:21:02 [Josh_Soref]

... i know the MC TF did

14:21:07 [Josh_Soref]

richt: it was fairly straightforward

14:21:22 [Josh_Soref]

... a few changes to the WebIDL, and a few changes to the services algorithm

14:21:30 [Josh_Soref]

... it was a bit figuring out how to plug into Promises

14:21:44 [Josh_Soref]

... it was an obvious decision

14:21:50 [Josh_Soref]

... it's a good time to do it

14:22:01 [Josh_Soref]

... if someone wants to make this API in the future, they'd want Promises

14:22:05 [Josh_Soref]

... so it's best for us to do it

14:22:18 [Josh_Soref]

... it removes the inline-callbacks from the getNetworkServices API

14:22:24 [Josh_Soref]

... Promises does allow backwards compat

14:22:34 [Josh_Soref]

... In Opera 12

14:22:52 [Josh_Soref]

... If people add parameters to the call, we can treat them as callbacks

14:23:01 [Josh_Soref]

... I like the backwards compat, it doesn't break what's out there

14:23:09 [Josh_Soref]

... and what's out there is experimental anyway

14:23:21 [Josh_Soref]

... everyone's looking at Promises, it's the way to handle Async calls

14:23:24 [Josh_Soref]

... it needed to be done

14:23:44 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: we should get review from slightlyoff or someone from Promises

14:23:56 [Josh_Soref]

richt: that sounds good

14:24:01 [Josh_Soref]

Josh_Soref: thanks

14:24:25 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: i'll ask TAG

14:24:33 [fjh]

action: fjh to ask TAG for feedback on promises with Network Discovery

14:24:33 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-644 - Ask TAG for feedback on promises with Network Discovery [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2013-07-31].

14:24:53 [fjh]

ISSUE-130?

14:24:53 [trackbot]

ISSUE-130 -- Enable variety of protocols (e.g. UPnP, Bonour) with protocol independent developer code -- open

14:24:53 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/130

14:25:12 [Josh_Soref]

i/130?/Topic: Network Service Discovery - Issues/

14:25:25 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: this is the layering issue

14:25:31 [Josh_Soref]

... richt and Cathy responded to this

14:25:38 [Josh_Soref]

richt: i sent an email to the list

14:25:44 [Josh_Soref]

... i don't have much more to add

14:25:52 [Josh_Soref]

... i see some issues with what's being requested

14:26:03 [Josh_Soref]

... it's intended as a convenience, but i think it creates confusion

14:26:19 [Josh_Soref]

... it could be simpler if a network service specified a fragment of an identifier

14:26:30 [Josh_Soref]

... but then you have no real idea about what you're getting back

14:26:49 [Josh_Soref]

... when you get something back,you'd have to check the service type

14:27:02 [Josh_Soref]

... my point is that if you're doing this, you should just request the service types up front

14:27:11 [Josh_Soref]

... the api lets you specify one or MORE up front

14:27:27 [Josh_Soref]

... requesting something with a fragment that may or may not match that list is really not useful

14:27:37 [Josh_Soref]

... you need to communicate with returned services

14:27:50 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: jcd is saying he wants to do things dynamically

14:27:59 [Josh_Soref]

Josh_Soref: personally, i agree w/ richt

14:28:12 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: it's hard to do w/o everyone on the call at once

14:28:33 [Josh_Soref]

Cathy: it brings up additional issues

14:28:44 [Josh_Soref]

... even if you know you're looking for a service type

14:28:52 [Josh_Soref]

... a vendor could make something different

14:29:00 [Josh_Soref]

... it might be useful looking for a upnp-print service

14:29:08 [gmandyam]

q+

14:29:11 [Josh_Soref]

... but if you're also looking for hp print service and canon

14:29:20 [Josh_Soref]

... but hp print service might not be what you can handle

14:29:24 [Josh_Soref]

ack gmandyam

14:29:32 [fjh]

ack gmandyman

14:29:55 [Josh_Soref]

gmandyam: the spec makes UPnP / mDNS discovery work

14:30:06 [Josh_Soref]

... does an IANA registry that's extensible make more sense?

14:30:16 [Josh_Soref]

richt: do you mean section-7?

14:30:33 [fjh]

https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/dap/raw-file/tip/discovery-api/Overview.html#service-discovery

14:30:39 [Josh_Soref]

gmandyam: if you want to do additional protocols outside UPnP/Bonjour

14:30:47 [Josh_Soref]

... my understanding of IANA registries

14:30:56 [Josh_Soref]

... is that you define a couple types in the W3 spec

14:31:06 [Josh_Soref]

... and you point people to the IANA registry for vendor specific prefixes

14:31:22 [Josh_Soref]

richt: i think the api is quite simple, it's a bootstrap mechanism for services

14:31:31 [Josh_Soref]

... how they're discovered is to guide the implementers

14:31:39 [Josh_Soref]

... but it's designed w/ extensibility in mind

14:31:48 [Josh_Soref]

... at a basic level, you specify a string type

14:31:57 [Josh_Soref]

... and we have a mapping for mDNS/UPnP

14:32:04 [Josh_Soref]

... the UA itself goes off and does something

14:32:10 [Josh_Soref]

... and then you have objects representing stuff

14:32:18 [Josh_Soref]

... then we use XHR from the web platform

14:32:35 [Josh_Soref]

gmandyam: but how does the extensibility take place in the spec

14:32:48 [Josh_Soref]

... if your intention is to add additional text that's informative

14:33:13 [Josh_Soref]

richt: i'm interested in hearing about other discovery mechanisms

14:33:26 [Josh_Soref]

... when i did my research, these two were a significant portion

14:33:33 [Josh_Soref]

... if there's other stuff that's applicable here,

14:33:35 [fjh]

what is the approach for extensibility for new mechanisms

14:33:39 [Josh_Soref]

... if necessary, we could add it in

14:33:51 [Josh_Soref]

... for proprietary extensibility

14:33:55 [Josh_Soref]

... it relies on the UA

14:34:03 [Josh_Soref]

... i don't see how that would work unless the UA understands

14:34:14 [Josh_Soref]

... if there's anything to talk about, we should bring it up on the list

14:34:27 [Josh_Soref]

gmandyam: i'll work internally on what our guys are working on

14:34:37 [Josh_Soref]

... we have "AllJoin", a local discovery mechanism

14:35:15 [fjh]

gmandyam, are you able to make a concrete proposal related to extensibility and IANA registration?

14:35:20 [Josh_Soref]

... it doesn't seem to make sense for the spec to have to be modified each time there's a new protocol

14:35:34 [Josh_Soref]

richt: i think it's a good point, that we should have some extensibility

14:35:44 [Josh_Soref]

... i'm trying to manage complexity

14:35:49 [Josh_Soref]

... we have experimental

14:36:00 [Josh_Soref]

... but we don't even have stage 1 - UPnP/Bonjour

14:36:13 [Josh_Soref]

... there's a tradeoff between having extensibility and knowing what it does to the UA

14:36:19 [Josh_Soref]

... and having implementation experience

14:36:42 [Josh_Soref]

... there's a case to be made to implement something and get something rolling before we tackle something more complexity on top

14:36:51 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: i'm wondering if what gmandyam is suggesting

14:36:57 [Josh_Soref]

... is a way forward

14:37:17 [Josh_Soref]

gmandyam: you're right, i need to put a proposal together

14:37:24 [Josh_Soref]

richt: yes, thank you gmandyam

14:38:16 [fjh]

ISSUE-131?

14:38:16 [trackbot]

ISSUE-131 -- Support UPnP device discovery by Device Type? -- open

14:38:16 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/131

14:39:12 [Josh_Soref]

Cathy: a device type can encapsulate multiple services

14:39:23 [Josh_Soref]

... the device type would be the thing that an application would look for

14:39:27 [fjh]

detailed summary from Cathy - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Jul/0041.html

14:39:43 [Josh_Soref]

... i was trying to put together the types of changes before my leave

14:40:19 [Josh_Soref]

richt: i should reply on the list

14:40:22 [Josh_Soref]

... i said what i needed on the list

14:40:36 [Josh_Soref]

... i think this comes down to a case of grouping services by device

14:40:44 [Josh_Soref]

... and it doesn't need to be combined w/ searching by device

14:40:49 [Josh_Soref]

... i know what to communicate

14:40:55 [Josh_Soref]

... i know how to speak "render control language"

14:41:12 [Josh_Soref]

... i know how to speak "dv foo"

14:41:20 [Josh_Soref]

... but i don't know how to speak "connection manager language"

14:41:35 [Josh_Soref]

... the compromise is to let services say that they come from the same device

14:41:55 [Josh_Soref]

... imagine you ask for RenderControl and AVTransport

14:42:01 [Josh_Soref]

s/dv foo/AV Transport language

14:42:10 [Josh_Soref]

... and the user is asked to authorize something

14:42:21 [Josh_Soref]

... and the user sees the devices instead of their features

14:42:24 [Josh_Soref]

... i click "TV"

14:42:33 [Josh_Soref]

... that exposes the RenderControl and AVTransport

14:42:48 [Josh_Soref]

... i didn't select based on the returned services, i select based on the provider

14:43:17 [Josh_Soref]

... in the callback, i get the things i asked for (RenderControl and AVTransport) without getting defunct things that i can't understand (ConnectionManager)

14:43:41 [Josh_Soref]

Cathy: if you search for device-types, you reduce the number of messages that go on the network

14:44:08 [Josh_Soref]

richt: i'm not too worried about network traffic as an optimization

14:44:42 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: thanks richt

14:44:53 [fjh]

ISSUE-132?

14:44:53 [trackbot]

ISSUE-132 -- Announce a webapp as a Network Services Discovery -- open

14:44:53 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/132

14:46:01 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: richt, i think you were saying it's too complicated

14:46:03 [fjh]

s/thanks richt/thanks rich, the distinction you make is useful/

14:46:12 [Josh_Soref]

richt: we've done experiments

14:46:16 [Josh_Soref]

... it is complicated

14:46:25 [Josh_Soref]

... if you do UPnP, you have to write a service description XML document

14:46:31 [Josh_Soref]

... you have to fully describe the service

14:46:35 [Josh_Soref]

... that's a lot of effort

14:46:57 [Josh_Soref]

... Say i'm a web page, and i'm offline

14:47:09 [Josh_Soref]

... I have audio, and i want to play the game with others on the local network

14:47:18 [Josh_Soref]

... advertising myself on the local network

14:47:23 [Josh_Soref]

... it isn't a crazy UC

14:47:28 [Josh_Soref]

... it's something that would be cool to do

14:47:32 [fjh]

is this a v2 topic?

14:47:37 [Josh_Soref]

... but i don't think i have the bandwidth to do it

14:47:43 [Josh_Soref]

... i'd like to see proposals

14:47:47 [Josh_Soref]

... there's prior art in this area

14:47:52 [Josh_Soref]

... there's stuff from WebInos

14:48:54 [Josh_Soref]

Cathy: i agree this is a v2 or v.next topic

14:49:04 [Josh_Soref]

... a lot of complexity

14:49:10 [Josh_Soref]

... it could be done in parallel

14:49:12 [fjh]

this could be an in depended specification, work on it independently, or v.next, no need to integrate into current specification

14:50:02 [fjh]

proposed RESOLUTION: address ISSUE-132 , announcing web app as network service discovery as separate spec from Network Service Discovery

14:50:11 [Josh_Soref]

Josh_Soref: +1

14:50:19 [Cathy]

+1

14:50:33 [Josh_Soref]

RESOLUTION: address ISSUE-132 , announcing web app as network service discovery as separate spec from Network Service Discovery

14:51:34 [Josh_Soref]

Cathy: i had comments, should i make issues?

14:51:36 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: yes please

14:51:42 [Josh_Soref]

richt: one other thing

14:51:51 [Josh_Soref]

... the network service discovery is quite tied to user opt in

14:52:05 [Josh_Soref]

... there's an opportunity to see if this could integrate with CORS

14:52:15 [fjh]

we should get PING review at some point as well, Privacy Interest group

14:52:18 [Josh_Soref]

... that'd need to be initiated by the device side

14:52:27 [Josh_Soref]

... that could allow less user opt in

14:52:36 [Josh_Soref]

... it would need a lot of changes at the UPnP side

14:52:42 [Josh_Soref]

... that would eliminate the need to opt in

14:52:50 [Josh_Soref]

Josh_Soref: i'm -1 on that sort of

14:53:04 [Josh_Soref]

... i don't want a game to automatically play sound on some other device on my network

14:53:26 [Josh_Soref]

richt: it doesn't have to be CORS, but some way for a UPnP service

14:53:39 [Josh_Soref]

... to say "i'm available to be contacted", so the user doesn't necessarily have to opt into sharing

14:53:50 [Josh_Soref]

... the barrier to implementation is a big one

14:54:02 [Josh_Soref]

... it requires a distinction in Browser Chrome

14:54:11 [Josh_Soref]

... you want to make the web better w/o hurting UX

14:54:33 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: isn't that a different layer in the stack?

14:54:46 [Josh_Soref]

... right now, i use bonjour, select a printer

14:54:57 [Josh_Soref]

... with UPnP, i find a device, i don't need permissions

14:54:59 [Josh_Soref]

Zakim, unmute me

14:54:59 [Zakim]

Josh_Soref should no longer be muted

14:55:30 [fjh]

are we talking about different protocol layers- e.g. network layer versus application layer

14:55:56 [fjh]

josh_soref: need to be careful here, don't want to blast music on device etc

14:56:08 [fjh]

… just because discoverable does not mean appropriate

14:56:35 [fjh]

fjh: currently if I print, bonjour just finds the printers then I select to print. permission through use?

14:56:35 [Josh_Soref]

richt: it's an interesting area to look at

14:56:41 [Josh_Soref]

... there may be compromises to look at

14:56:49 [Josh_Soref]

... there are devices advertising publicly

14:57:01 [Josh_Soref]

... if we could understand the issues in doing that

14:57:23 [Josh_Soref]

... it wouldn't be free for all, there needs to be some mechanism to sort them out

14:57:30 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: certainly need to look at privacy

14:59:12 [Josh_Soref]

Josh_Soref: these things don't scale well between `home` and `office`

14:59:35 [Josh_Soref]

... just because a tv wants to advertise itself in the home doesn't mean it will work correctly when someone buys that cheap tv and installs it in an office

14:59:43 [Josh_Soref]

richt: it's a blue-sky idea

14:59:51 [Josh_Soref]

... the implications are big, and useful

15:00:01 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: Josh_Soref, you'll send a message?

15:00:07 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: we'll want to do a PSIG review

15:00:17 [gmandyam]

Have to go. Thanks. -Giri

15:00:19 [Josh_Soref]

... i could ask them to look at the spec, but they won't understand the technology

15:00:24 [Zakim]

-gmandyam

15:00:28 [Josh_Soref]

... i think it's premature to do that now

15:00:40 [Josh_Soref]

... i'm waiting to see when the spec is ready

15:00:50 [Josh_Soref]

richt: we didn't have too many problems in Opera 12 Labs

15:00:56 [Josh_Soref]

... we didn't do ZeroConf, only UPnP

15:01:01 [Josh_Soref]

... we tweaked this a bit

15:01:09 [Josh_Soref]

... we have some implementation experience

15:01:21 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: so i should share it with them, and let them know it's under development

15:01:26 [Josh_Soref]

richt: that works for me

15:01:38 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: should we publish first or take feedback?

15:01:53 [Josh_Soref]

... they might want someone to walk them PSIG through it on a call

15:02:22 [Josh_Soref]

s/PSIG/PING

15:02:23 [Josh_Soref]

s/PSIG/PING

15:02:44 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: the issues that tend to come up tend to be fairly generic

15:02:49 [Josh_Soref]

... you might get some feedback

15:02:54 [Josh_Soref]

RRSAgent, draft minutes

15:02:54 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/07/24-dap-minutes.html Josh_Soref

15:02:56 [fjh]

action: fjh to share Network Service Discovery editors draft with PING

15:02:56 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-645 - Share Network Service Discovery editors draft with PING [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2013-07-31].

15:03:17 [fjh]

Topic: Action Items

15:03:18 [Josh_Soref]

topic: Action Items

15:03:24 [fjh]

close ACTION-639

15:03:24 [trackbot]

Closed ACTION-639 Send Vibration CR CfC and make transition request once LC disposition complete.

15:03:38 [fjh]

close ACTION-640

15:03:38 [trackbot]

Closed ACTION-640 Respond to Nick and Rigo re privacy concerns in Proximity, Light.

15:04:02 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: i'd like to get feedback on Promises

15:04:07 [Josh_Soref]

... and then i'll start thinking about publication

15:04:33 [Josh_Soref]

topic: Other Business

15:04:45 [Josh_Soref]

fjh: glad richt could make it

15:05:11 [Josh_Soref]

topic: Adjourn

15:05:23 [Josh_Soref]

trackbot, end meeting

15:05:23 [trackbot]

Zakim, list attendees

15:05:23 [Zakim]

As of this point the attendees have been Josh_Soref, fjh, +1.858.651.aaaa, gmandyam\, richt, +1.781.362.aabb, Cathy

15:05:25 [Zakim]

-richt

15:05:27 [Zakim]

-fjh

15:05:27 [Zakim]

-Cathy

15:05:29 [Zakim]

UW_DAP()10:00AM has ended

15:05:29 [Zakim]

Attendees were Josh_Soref, fjh, +1.858.651.aaaa, gmandyam\, richt, +1.781.362.aabb, Cathy

15:05:31 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, please draft minutes

15:05:31 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/07/24-dap-minutes.html trackbot

15:05:32 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, bye

15:05:32 [RRSAgent]

I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2013/07/24-dap-actions.rdf :

15:05:32 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: fjh to ask TAG for feedback on promises with Network Discovery [1]

15:05:32 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/07/24-dap-irc#T14-24-33

15:05:32 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: fjh to share Network Service Discovery editors draft with PING [2]

15:05:32 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/07/24-dap-irc#T15-02-56