IRC log of browserext on 2016-10-20

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:29:15 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #browserext
14:29:15 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/10/20-browserext-irc
14:29:23 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #browserext
14:29:31 [Florian]
Meeting: Browser Extension CG teleconf
14:29:40 [Florian]
ScribeNick: Florian
14:29:48 [Florian]
Chair: Florian
14:29:52 [Florian]
present+ Florian
14:32:17 [aswan]
i joined the one from the invitation but am the only one there...
14:32:37 [mikepie]
present+ mikepie
14:32:41 [AndersR]
AndersR has joined #browserext
14:32:53 [mikepie]
It
14:33:00 [mikepie]
It's failing for me too
14:33:03 [mikepie]
I'll resend...
14:33:18 [AndersR]
hangout problem here
14:34:19 [shwetank]
shwetank has joined #browserext
14:35:09 [shwetank]
anyone here? Im trying to connect to the google hangout, but its giving me erorrs while also saying im the only one in the call
14:35:38 [John-Galt]
shwetank: https://hangouts.google.com/call/kkkwlctkpfanfbcbggl5tn2diye
14:40:35 [Florian]
Topic: Joint statment
14:41:09 [Florian]
Florian: Where do we go from the basic draft we have?
14:41:32 [Florian]
mikepie: I can understand from an implementation perspective how these two might overlap
14:41:49 [Florian]
mikepie: but I am not sure I understand how it helps us to raise this to the TAG etc.
14:45:43 [Florian]
Florian: To me the idea is to notify the TAG that we're working on an area where it seems that other groups have interest working on as well. We're about to do our own thing, but if a grand unifying solution should be made instead, they should wake up now and kick off something, otherwise, we'll do our thing
14:46:37 [Florian]
AndersR: I have tried to interest the TAG in such things before, but they didn't pay attention. I'm just an individual, but if there is more people interested in the topic, including large corps, maybe they'll pay attention this time.
14:48:09 [Florian]
mikepie: Who was on the web payment side? Eirk?
14:48:17 [Florian]
Florian: Yes, but we haven't talked since TPAC
14:48:29 [Florian]
AndersR: Someone from google as well.
14:49:36 [Florian]
mikepie: I'd be curious to hear about what they think. I don't think what they're doing requires explicit native messaging
14:50:38 [Florian]
Florian: so I suggest we keep moving forward with our specs, and in parallel use that statement to allert the broarder community and see if we get feedback
14:51:42 [Florian]
mikepie: Can we try directly engagine with the web payment folks first, maybe in a call, before spending too much time on a formal statement?
14:51:49 [Florian]
Florian: Sure
14:52:09 [Florian]
ACTION florian to try and arrange a call with web payment people
14:52:30 [Florian]
Topic: https://browserext.github.io/native-messaging/
14:53:19 [Florian]
aswan: Mike has done a lot of work, and made an outline for the draft
14:54:09 [Florian]
aswan: mike explained that Edge is planing to take a different route from Mozilla and Chrome on some aspects, so we decided to leave these parts unspecified
14:54:39 [Florian]
aswan: where we are differing is the actual protocol between the browser and the native app.
14:55:06 [Florian]
aswan: the part that will be specified then is permission, the manifest, and the API that the browser exposes to the web app.
14:55:21 [Florian]
aswan: IPC and finding applications would be out of scope.
14:55:32 [Florian]
aswan: that will simplify what the spec needs to cover
14:56:23 [Florian]
Florian: so setting up the environment, launching the app, etc would be non standard, but talking to it would be
14:56:28 [Florian]
aswan: essentially.
14:56:51 [Florian]
aswan: that enables more platform integration and doing things the native way
14:57:16 [Florian]
mikepie: Yes. A way to look at this is that we are standardizing the web part, but the native part remains system specific.
14:59:21 [Florian]
Florian: as we're not trying to recreate flash or NPAPI, and not trying to distribute native code, but to integrate with an environment that's presumably already there. So on a first approach that makes sense to me.
14:59:59 [Florian]
mikepie: (aside: I cleaned up the spec and added some script, now it's nicer).
15:00:44 [Florian]
Florian: I am a bit surprised that ReSpec can't solve these things for you, but if it works now, fine
15:00:54 [Florian]
mikepie: I'll keep digging the respec doc, but for now it works
15:02:34 [Florian]
aswan: we had a recent meeting as a kick off just to established the outline, now we need to fill things in.
15:03:39 [Florian]
Florian: anything to discuss here now?
15:03:51 [Florian]
aswan: first we need to fill in the document, then work through issues
15:04:09 [Florian]
Florian: Ideally let's work on the issues on github, and if something gets stuck we can use this call.
15:05:02 [Florian]
Topic: Logo
15:05:28 [Florian]
mikepie: Our tweeter feed still has an egg. This is embarassing.
15:05:44 [Florian]
Florian: yes it is
15:05:45 [John-Galt]
https://github.com/mozilla/OpenDesign
15:06:18 [Florian]
kmag2: we have a community design portal, that could be relevant
15:06:29 [aswan]
i have another meeting starting, have to drop off...
15:07:03 [Florian]
Florian: I am skeptical of design by comittee
15:07:09 [Florian]
kmag2: it wouldn't be that
15:07:37 [Florian]
Florian: then sure.
15:07:52 [Florian]
shwetank: Can we start with something as a default, and improve on that as we get feedbac? I like 8
15:08:21 [Florian]
Is this the updated version: https://mikepie1.github.io/browserext-1/LogoIdeas.png
15:09:44 [John-Galt]
8/7
15:09:53 [Florian]
Florian: Strall poll: pick your favorite two, ranked
15:10:05 [mikepie]
6,5
15:10:17 [Florian]
Florian: 8, 5
15:10:20 [shwetank]
8/9
15:10:31 [AndersR]
8/9
15:11:22 [Florian]
Florian: looks like an 8 to me. Everybody can live with that?
15:11:24 [Florian]
mikepie: sure.
15:11:55 [Florian]
Florian: Mike, please send me the good quality version, and I'll use it for the twitter account
15:12:16 [Florian]
shwetank: would prefer a while background
15:12:40 [Florian]
mikepie: you would only see the shield then
15:12:42 [Florian]
shwetank: ok
15:13:04 [Florian]
ACTION kmag2 to get feedback from Mozilla
15:13:23 [kmag]
present+ Kris Maglione
15:13:27 [Florian]
TOPIC: https://browserext.github.io/browserext/
15:13:51 [Florian]
mikepie: I'll walk you through the updates first
15:14:13 [Florian]
mikepie: I have registered the URI scheme.
15:14:23 [Florian]
Florian: thanks
15:14:32 [Florian]
mikepie: Also referenced our specifications with SpecRef
15:14:50 [Florian]
mikepie: also added the script I mentioned earlier to get nice formatting for WebIDL
15:15:09 [Florian]
mikepie: I've synced the issues in the spec and github
15:15:13 [Florian]
Florian: Nice, thanks.
15:15:43 [Florian]
mikepie: Issue 1 and 2 and large todos for myself.
15:16:39 [Florian]
mikepie: we talked about trying to be consistent on IDs. I would be ok with not doing that, but if we should do it, doing it now would be good. I'll talk to my team
15:17:18 [Florian]
mikepie: Issues in green are marked as resolved. I'll remove them with the next pull request, so I'd like you to confirm that they're all OK.
15:18:26 [Florian]
(note minuting the issue numbers as they are changing)
15:18:39 [Florian]
s/note/not/
15:18:53 [Florian]
mikepie: we removed the mention of bookmarks
15:19:10 [Florian]
Florian: can do it later right?
15:19:24 [Florian]
mikepie: Yes, not part of the core. Can be grafted on later.
15:20:43 [Florian]
mikepie: Talking about the availability about the APIs, we define it in terms of the default CSP, with a link to it.
15:20:51 [Florian]
(issues 6 7 and 8)
15:22:05 [Florian]
mikepie: issue 10 (github #19). I had text about content scripts and imediate events and delayed events, and I wasn't quite sure what it meant anyway, so I've removed for now
15:22:40 [Florian]
mikepie: issue 11, at tpac we had decided to remove the optional permission part of the table. Now that's done.
15:23:03 [Florian]
mikepie: Specified that unknonwn manifest keys can be ignored
15:23:52 [Florian]
Florian: do have normative text about the mechanism to require some keys, to deal with forward compat?
15:24:00 [Florian]
kmag: I don't think that's in there yet
15:24:18 [Florian]
mikepie: I'll add an issue for that
15:24:41 [Florian]
Florian: yes, it would be good to have in the spec now that keys can be otherwise ignored
15:25:20 [Florian]
mikepie: issue 13 is about my bit of helper javascript
15:25:50 [Florian]
mikepie: Issue 14. Waiting for Andrey
15:26:09 [Florian]
Florian: Please at mention him (and me) in github. Will follow up
15:26:53 [Florian]
mikepie: 15/16: at tpac we agreed on formatting for the webIDL, so I made these changes.
15:27:59 [Florian]
mikepie: 18. This was just a work item for me, I filled a section in.
15:28:25 [Florian]
mikepie: issue 19 / gh11. At Tpac we agreed about removing the extension object because it was redundant with runtime. So I did that.
15:28:56 [Florian]
mikepie: issue 20 / 21. Just work items for me.
15:29:21 [Florian]
kmag: I'll add in some documentation from our code. Chrome documentation is a bit light, so there are details to fill in
15:29:24 [Florian]
mikepie: thanks
15:30:17 [Florian]
mikepie: started to do some research about whether our API coverage is sufficient for good support of basic extensions.
15:30:38 [Florian]
mikepie: lastError and onInstalled would help a lot of extensions
15:30:59 [Florian]
kmag: not sure about lastError. Not really needed if we're going the promisses
15:31:26 [Florian]
Florian: didn't we say we kept callbacks as a fallback?
15:32:53 [Florian]
kmag: that's what firefox does, but I thought said we would not including that in the browser namespace, and if you want to do callbacks, you'd do it with a polyfil, maybe under the chrome namespace
15:33:07 [Florian]
mikepie: that's what we were discussing, but we hadn't resolved
15:33:25 [Florian]
shwetank: I think I want callback fallbacks, but I'll think about this
15:33:36 [kmag]
https://github.com/kmaglione/webextension-polyfill
15:34:08 [Florian]
kmag: the polyfill library I wrote only supports promisses in the browser namespace. we could do it the other way around
15:34:35 [kmag]
That should be https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill
15:35:07 [Florian]
Florian: we need an issue in github to track this debate
15:35:50 [Florian]
mikepie: one last thing. It looks like "capture visible tab" and "onReplaced" would help cover a lot more extensions
15:37:07 [Florian]
kmag: not sure about onReplaced. We have it as a stub, but it is not backed by actual functionality. I don't actually know when chrome actually triggers it.
15:37:18 [Florian]
shwetank: haven't seen people use it
15:37:25 [Florian]
mikepie: so we can skip that one.
15:41:01 [Florian]
Topic: next meeting
15:41:09 [Florian]
all: argue back and forth
15:41:38 [Florian]
Florian: So we go with Monday novemeber the 17th, half an hour earlier than today (anchored on US time zones)
15:42:19 [Florian]
RRSAgent, make log public
15:42:25 [Florian]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:42:25 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/10/20-browserext-minutes.html Florian
15:44:07 [Florian]
RRSAgent, bye
15:44:07 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items