See also: IRC log
<dom> ScribeNick: anssik
<scribe> New Staff Contact: Fuqiao Xue
<xfq> hi
xfq: recently joined W3C
Staff
... you can find me from GH as xfq
dom: introductions
anssik: from Intel, editor of specifications in this group and elsewhere, chair of Second Screen WG & Web NFC CG
kenneth: from Intel, editor of Web NFC, Web App Manifest, some sensor specs, working on Chrome and web standards
mikhail: from Intel, editor of Generic Sensor API and concrete sensors, working on Chrome too
shalamov: Alex from Intel, working on Web NFC and the Generic Sensor API, located in Finland with Mikhail and Anssi
Andrey_Logvinov: from Yandex, editor of the Wake Lock API specification
Wanming_Lin: from Intel, test facilitator in this group
dom: need to discuss with
Frederick if we can find a new time for the call, since key
contributors are EU based
... announcement: HTML Media Capture published as revised
CR
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2017Aug/0018.html
https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/uccigfMg/
PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Approve minutes from 29 June 2017
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2017Jun/att-0017/minutes-2017-06-29.html
RESOLUTION: Approve minutes from 29 June 2017
17: 10 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2017Jun/att-0017/minutes-2017-06-29.html
dom: good activity over summer,
publication on TR
... overview of the work and status, and roadmap to
completion
... for Level 1, and wide review
<dom> anssik: over the summer we have addressed all level 1 issues that impact the implementation
<dom> ... which requried normative changes ot the spec
<dom> ... we have stabilized the implementation and have agreement to start origin trial in Chrome 62
We intend to experiment with the Accelerometer, LinearAccelerationSensor, Gyroscope, AbsoluteOrientationSensor and RelativeOrientationSensor interfaces
<dom> ... the list was chosen because these APIs don't expose new features
<dom> ... they are replacement for DeviceMotion and DeviceOrientation
<dom> ... for the first phase of the origin trial we want to get feedback from developers on the API shape and ergonomics
<dom> ... based on tha tfeedback, we might adjust the API and expand the scope
<dom> ... we're starting outreach on the API toward developers
<dom> ... the origin trial will run over the course over 3 major releases
<dom> ... by EOY we should get a good amount of feedback from web developers
<dom> ... I have 2 proposals: A - with the current spec, we could publish a CR soonish, and if the feedback from Web developers motivate change, we might need to revise it
<dom> ... B - we wait until we get that feedback, and only then publish CR
<dom> dom: either plan sound fine - main question is whether we want to signal we're done or not - I think we're kind in the middle
<dom> ... to go to CR, we need to get our wide reviews done, and get our issues closed
<xfq> scribenick: xfq
dom: privacy and security issues
<anssik> dom: if we go to CR, we need to ensure a) we have completed all wide reviews, and b) agree on scope i.e. Generic Sensor API only or Generic Sensor API + some set of concrete sensor specs
<dom> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2017Aug/att-0017/das-review.pdf
dom: we need to do wide
reviews
... we did wide reviews for generic sensors and ambient
light
anssik: it's kind of better to review the sensor API specs as a set
<anssik> anssik: prefer to do wide review for Generic Sensor API, Ambient Light Sensor, Accelerometer, Gyroscope, Magnetometer, Orientation Sensor together
dom: I suggest we call the attention of the WebVR CG
<inserted> ScribeNick: anssik
dom: should reach out to WebVR CG too since the work is of interest to them
https://github.com/w3c/webvr/issues/249
https://github.com/w3c/webvr/issues/250
dom: per the wide review process the chair to do the wide review requests to all horizontal groups
<dom> ACTION: Dom to work with Frederick on getting a wide review question on sensor specs (- proximity), pointing out motion sensors explainer [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/09/07-dap-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-805 - Work with frederick on getting a wide review question on sensor specs (- proximity), pointing out motion sensors explainer [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2017-09-14].
kenneth_: should include also the Motion Explainer in the review
dom: how should we approach the WebVG CG
<dom> ACTION: Anssi to get in touch with WebVR CG on wide review of motion sensor specs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/09/07-dap-minutes.html#action02]
anssik: I can take an action on it
<trackbot> Created ACTION-806 - Get in touch with webvr cg on wide review of motion sensor specs [on Anssi Kostiainen - due 2017-09-14].
dom: could transition to CR around October assuming wide review feedback is addressed
<dom> https://github.com/w3c/sensors/issues/155
<dom> https://w3ctag.github.io/security-questionnaire/
https://w3c.github.io/ambient-light/#security-and-privacy
https://w3c.github.io/sensors/#mitigation-strategies
dom: it might be that completing the questionnaire for Generic Sensor API will address most security and privacy concerns, but still need to double check the concrete specs adhere too
<dom> ACTION-805: For TAG, create a bundle issue for all sensors preferably
<trackbot> Notes added to ACTION-805 Work with frederick on getting a wide review question on sensor specs (- proximity), pointing out motion sensors explainer.
<dom> ACTION: Alexander to run self-review questionnaire on sensor specs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/09/07-dap-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-807 - Run self-review questionnaire on sensor specs [on Alexander Shalamov - due 2017-09-14].
dom: started wide review for Wake
Lock API
... if we don't get new blocking issues we advance to CR next
month
Andrey_Logvinov: spec in its current state not implemented anywhere
dom: the spec is in good shape, so now ready for implementation
https://github.com/w3c/battery/pull/13
anssik: PR #13 in review, after landed and implemented in Chrome, can publish revised CR
<dom> dom: do we need another review from WebAppSec/PING before revising CR?
<dom> anssik: not sure if that's needed/useful
<dom> ACTION: Dom to look into the need to get wide review of revised battery [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/09/07-dap-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-808 - Look into the need to get wide review of revised battery [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2017-09-14].
dom: our charter expires EOY, we
have work to complete beyond that date
... talked to Jeffrey asking if WebBT would like to migrate to
WG
... Jeffrey prefers to stay in incubation until another
implementer is interested
<dom> https://github.com/w3c/dap-charter/issues/29
<dom> https://github.com/w3c/dap-charter/issues/30
dom: another issue, whether to
bring WebNFC to this WG, the same for WebUSB
... also proposal to stop joint work on Media Capture TF
... this will minimize admin overhead
... adding more sensors to the DAS WG scope, in particular
enviromental sensors
... also recast Geolocation API on top of Generic Sensor, and
adopt old DeviceOrientation API maintenance
<dom> https://github.com/w3c/dap-charter/issues
dom: next call in two weeks