<adarose> Hi!

Hi Ada!

<adarose> I'm using a terminal IRC client I feel like such a hacker

<adarose> It's starting now

<adarose> can you see or hear me?

<dom> adarose, we couldn't see or hear you afaict

<scribe> scribe: cwilso

Ada: we sent out notes on IRC, etc, last week, and we're going to trial that system today and at TPAC.
... zakim, who is here?

Nell to give short update on Privacy workshop

<dom> W3C Workshop on Permissions and User Consent

NW: there was a 2-day W3C Workshop, covering wide range of topics from value of permission prompts and how users understand them, to DoNotTrack
... I presented the thinking we've had, from John's doc (and a "what is webxr")

<dom> THE IMMERSIVE WEB, Nell Waliczek (slides at workshop)

NW: covered different threats we see, and asked for feedback.

<dom> Minutes of session on permissions in New Contexts

NW: in the context of feedback, asked for prior art. two things that came up were Devices and S3nsors and Fullscreen (so, already the things we were looking at)?

<dom> Minutes of second session on XR in workshop

NW: followup: I presume we are going to talk about this at TPAC, and/or I can set up another telecon about this topic. I don't think anything directly actionable came out of the workshop
... one thing that did come out was "what would it look like for the W3C to do user research to drive questions like 'do users understand the privacy decisions they're making'?"
... there were a couple instances of people not making progress due to lack of usable user data on what users actually understand, and being opinion-based instead.
... </end summary>

Ada: we [IW chairs+editors] have been discussing the next FTF, post-TPAC

We've settled on Tuesday January 29th - Wednesday January 30th, at Samsung Research America in the bay area

NW: You may be surprised, as we don't even have the agenda for TPAC out yet, but given our tight timeframes, we wanted to get it on the calendar.

Address confusion regarding XRFrameOfReference types - NellWaliczek

https://github.com/immersive-web/webxr/issues/396

and https://github.com/immersive-web/webxr/issues/389 on local frame of reference

NW: sorry to not get the summary out ahead of time.
... at FTF, we spent 2-2.5 hrs talking about general confusion on frames of reference, how it relates to anchors, etc
... how are we going to shape this information so it's sensible to developers (without that 3 hours of explanation).
... so I've been putting together a proposal that covers everything I heard at the FTF - PR pending, should show up tomorrow.
... creating a mental model from what the developer is trying to do, rather than from what the tracking system exposes.
... my intent is to chat about it next Tuesday in the offweek call,
... and merge it (or can it) within the next two weeks.
... the design covers 3 things: 1) frame of reference types, 2) local frame of reference, and 3) poseless sessions

<lincolnfrog> what about the dynamic coordinate systems part of that?

<lincolnfrog> sounds good, thanks!

NW: for the first round, there are 5-6 smaller scope issues I didn't include yet. the intent is to list the "further issues to address" in the PR, and I'll file those issues when merging.

BJ: I've been working with Nell closely on this proposal, and I'm on board. we're discovering just how tightly intertwined the entire API is, but we're trying to keep these large-scale changes as modular as possible.

NW: as I was pulling coordinate systems/frame of reference stuff together, I realized we should do the same for the input stuff.
... should we defer discussing URP/Poseless until my update is out?

BJ: David outlined some of the pros and cons - I think the "next steps" bit had an interesting question, "should WebXR always be able to create a session, even if it doesn't track a device?:"
... I'd like to get a feel for how people feel about this concept?

<BrandonJones_Google> +1

<adarose> +1

<NellWaliczek> +1

AT: poseless in general seems find; wonder how much we need to provide model transforms. [? sorry, my attention wandered]

NW: but from Microsoft's perspective, you'd be okay creating a session even with no tracking device available?

AT: yes, I think so, would want to see full design

TS: My problem with this has always been not technical, but a general concern - I get that uniform RAF would be good, but this seems like it's turning into a general rendering use case, that might be NOT XR.

BJ: Nell and I had discussed "mutable sessions" at one point - sessiosn that could go from inline to immersive and back
... that might alleviate that concern a bit? But of course we might not go with that API shape.

NW: Also, don't read too much into "we've contemplated this". It was just a thought experiment, not a PR.

TS: I get this. But if someone made a session that works in flat mode, why isn't think just called a "rendering session" rather than an XR session?
... it';s not a killer to the idea, but just a concern in positioning.

Is XRDevice still necessary? - toji

BJ: As of 15 minutes ago, I have a PR up. WHY HAVEN'T YOU ALL READ IT YET?!?
... but to explain ... one of the things I personally heard from developers attemping to use the XR API is that it's very complex.
... there are areas that I think we can simplify, and at the prompting of Apple and others, the XRDevice became a lot less interesting.
... this PR moves session creation up to ???, and gets rid of XRDevice altogether. Please take a look.

<adarose> https://github.com/immersive-web/webxr/pull/405/files

AT: at a high level, it makes sense to me. The only time I'd expect to see this would be multiple headsets on a desktop, or choosing between AR or VR on a mobile device that supports both. But the latter seems fixable with XRModes.
... we can always add a device abstraction later if necessary for the former case,

NW: AT, can you ask Rafael to take a look at this, to sanity-check device connect/disconnect?

<NellWaliczek> Specifically regarding adaptor selection

AT: sure. even if there's a gap, it's quite possible we could fill it without re-introducing the whole device layer.

ada: I hope you all found IRC minuting okay. Any last points/

NW: we do want to get into a better position on scribing. We'll need to rotate scribes.

Dom: for anyone who has hesitations on this, we'll be there FTF at TPAC.

<dom> WG Meetings repo

<adarose> +1

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/DNT/DoNotTrack/
Succeeded: s/Samsung America/Samsung Research America/
Succeeded: s/DOM/Dom/

WARNING: Replacing previous Present list. (Old list: cwilso, Dominique_Hazael-Massieux, Alex_Turner, Max_Rebuschatis, Rik_Cabanier, Ada_Rose_Cannon, Trevor_Smith, Brandon_Jones, David_Dorwin, Ron_Padzensky, Phu_Le, Chris_Wilson, adarose)
Use 'Present+ ... ' if you meant to add people without replacing the list,
such as: <dbooth> Present+ cwilso, Dominique_Hazael-Massieux, Alex_Turner, Max_Rebuschatis, Rik_Cabanier, Ada_Rose_Cannon, Trevor_Smith, Brandon_Jones, David_Dorwin, Ron_Padzensky, Phu_Le

Present: cwilso Dominique_Hazael-Massieux Alex_Turner Max_Rebuschatis Rik_Cabanier Ada_Rose_Cannon Trevor_Smith Brandon_Jones David_Dorwin Ron_Padzensky Phu_Le Nell_Waliczek Artem Bolgar David Dorwin
Found Scribe: cwilso
Inferring ScribeNick: cwilso
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-immersive-web/2018Sep/0027.html

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)