Meeting minutes
MiniApp Workshop recap by Wendy (W3C)
<wseltzer> https://www.w3.org/2020/07/seltzer-miniapp-slides.pdf
angel: we have guests from the W3C team to join the discussions
wendy: We concluded with next steps. CG to refine the scope of MiniApp WG charter
… set up joint meetings with other working groups
… they can learn from the miniapp ecosystem as well
… we from the W3C team will do a lot of work to help with the connections with other parts of the W3C community
… while the charter development is going on
… we anticipate the group work on specs and requirements on manifest, packaging, lifecycle, URI scheme
… and overall requirements, and security model and permissions
… we heard from participants in the workshop
… we want to give a single place of contact and information for miniapps
… even if some of the requirements and features cooridanated with other groups
… series of conversations in our virtual TPAC meeting
… we need to build strong support among the community before the AC review
… I heard from the CG that there's great interest in a WG
… any comments or questions?
angel: any feedback the W3C team has for our current work scope and the way we're heading for?
wendy: many participants from the global community
… good show of interest and willingness to work together
… global community is still learning the miniapp ecosystem
… see where we can reuse and learn the experience we have on the web platform
… for new features in the web platform
angel: any questions or comments for wendy, especially for those who were not in the virtual meeting?
[silence]
angel: that's the great recap
… after the recap we should talk about the way forward
… there was a lot of confusion about the next step
… lots of discussions about joint meetings
… wonder if plh can share what the miniapp CG should do
… what would be the necessary preparation step for creating a WG?
plh: still a lot of questions from the members about the scope of the charter
… one of the questions we need to answer is the runtime environment question asked by Baidu
https://www.w3.org/2020/07/31-miniapp-minutes.html#t05
plh: we as W3C staff will spend some of our technical resources on this problem
Next Step for MiniApp standardization
plh: after we answer the runtime question, we can figure out
… how much work can happen in the miniapp WG, and how much work can happen in other WGs
… runtime environment question is the hardest one
angel: I'm a little bit worried about this question
… it could be a chicken and egg problem
… the miniapp vendors are still thinking about the runtime
… there should be a way for the miniapp vendors themselves to answer this question
… if they don't have a unified answer for this question, can we move forward?
plh: it's not a blocker
… but we need to know what we should write into the charter
… e.g., if we need to add lifecycle in the WG charter
… it's possible that miniapp runtime is different from web runtime
… and miniapp needs to write its own set of specs
… I'm hoping the CG has some answers on the runtime question
… we should also look at the current 4 specs, not just the runtime question
… for URI scheme, we need clear use cases and requirements
… for manifest, I had a meeting with the webapps WG chairs this morning
… including Marcos who is an editor of the web app manifest
… would be great if miniapp manifest editor can have a call with them
… we need to see if we can converge on some of the properties
… if the CG is OK with it we can have a call before the end of August
… need more study on packacging
… ZIP vs CBOR
… whether the two packaging formats should converge
xiaoqian: Fuqiao and I will look at the differences of the browser and miniapp runtime
… you may expect questions from us
… any one who is interesting in manifest, feel free to join the joint call with webapps WG
angel: when is the joint meeting?
<tomayac> (I would be interested in joining the manifest meeting.)
xiaoqian: targeting next week
yongjing: I'm afraid next week would be difficult for me
… postpone one week?
xiaoqian: sure
… you will be a key person for this meeting
angel: the week of August 17
… open to all miniapp CG participants?
xiaoqian: yes
plh: the meeting will focus on manifest
plh: Marcos told me they're moving it to CR
… do not expect to add new features now
… but welcome proposals
<tomayac> (I'm in the Berlin time zone)
angel: good to know
… for URI, we need to hear from Baidu if they're feeling comfortable to come up with more use cases and requirements
plh: we also have Yves Lafon to look at it on our side
plh: for packaging, URI scheme, runtime, we need some study
… hope to finish the study by the end of this month on our side
… depending on the result of that we can decide what we write into the charter
angel: for packaging, anyone to talk to?
plh: not yet
… should do some study first
… packaging work is shared between W3C and IETF
… probably need IETF participation too
wendy: many of them in IETF are also in W3C
… not very far to reach out
angel: any specific actions we need to take?
… after the study, do we need joint meeting with them to make sure they're in the loop?
plh: potentially yes
… especially if the use cases and requirements are similar
… if the use cases and requirements are too different we should work on them in the miniapp CG/WG
angel: last topic, lifecycle
plh: dependent on the runtime
… figure out the design choices
angel: difficult to find a document in W3C
… understand that W3C wants to have one document to document all lifecycles
plh: a question we have asked us for more than 20 years: do we write specs for developers? implementors?
… nowadays we write specs for implementors
… not for developers
… we joined the MDN project to help developers understand the specs
… developers can go to MDN
… for miniapps we can have a similar approach
… specs for implementors, and other documents for developers
plh: if in the end the two runtime are too different
… then it's up to the CG for how to write the specs
xiaoqian: for URI scheme, in the virtual meeting
… the TAG, Apple, Google, Facebook proposed their solutions on deeplinks
… we need some time to look into these solutions
… understand if they cover our use cases
… same for lifecycle, packaging etc.
angel: let's hear from other participants
… especially miniapp vendors
… about the next step
<xiaoqian> [Angel explains the proposals in Chinese]
angel: if you like the plan, +1
… don't care, 0
… don't like it, -1
yongjing: +1
xfq: +1
<Qing_An> +1
<tomayac> 0 (as an observer)
zuming: +1
Tengyuan_Zhang: +1
dan_zhou: +1
<angel> +1
angel: will move forward with the plan
… let's wait for three more weeks, and see how we can modify our WG charter
… thank you all!
TPAC planning
angel: plan for TPAC?
angel: would you like to have a CG meeting in TPAC?
… joint meeting with other groups?
<xiaoqian> Joint Group meetings - week of 12-16 October
<xiaoqian> WG/IG/BG Group Meetings - week of 19-23 October
<xiaoqian> the TPAC breakout sessions - week of 26 to 30 October
https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC/2020/GroupMeetings
[xiaoqian introduces TPAC to CG participants]
xiaoqian: due to COVID-19, TPAC this year is virtual
… we need to reach out to relevant groups if we would like to have joint meetings with them
… we can also talk in breakout sessions about new ideas for standardization
… any interest in joint meetings and/or CG virtual F2F?
angel: thank you xiaoqian for the intro
<xiaoqian> +1 to make the Oct Month Call the TPAC meeting for the CG
angel: there's CG call in September anyway
… we can make use of the TPAC slot
… any objection?
[silence]
angel: for joint meetings
… WebApps WG? Service Workers WG?
… what's the procedure for joint meetings?
xiaoqian: not sure if Service Workers WG meets in TPAC
angel: not in https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC/2020/GroupMeetings#WG.2FIG.2FBG_Group_Meetings_details currently
xiaoqian: maybe the chairs can start reaching out to these groups
… after the study of the runtime
angel: but the deadline for filling in the tables is 13 August
… there's only one week
angel: next call, September 10, same time
<tomayac> Looking forward to hearing the runtime plans!
angel: I wonder if some of us can meet before that to talk about runtime
… any preference?
[silence]
angel: let's target the week of August 17
… probably the same time as the current meeting, i.e., 8pm Beijing
… I will send a Doodle poll
angel: thank you all!
[adjourned]