Meeting minutes
[roundtable]
yongjing: three major topics
… one is the review of the deliverables against FPWD plan
… to see if we can meet the target
… already the end of Q1
… try to deliver FPWD
… we will review and discuss them
… discuss issues and PRs
… CJK meeting
FPWD plan
Manifest
yongjing: let's go one by one
Charter w/ milestones: https://
yongjing: let's see the status
… for manifest
… still need further work at least on the i18n problem
… we see contributions coming today
… we can discuss that
… need to check with WebApps WG
… to align with WAM
… personally think it needs at least 2 months to stabilize
… any comment?
xfq: I think we can publish the FPWD as it is and refine the i18n part before CR
Yongjing: I'm new to the Process
Yongjing: do you think we can publish it without solving the i18n issue?
xfq: I think so
xfq: Some activities in the Web App Manifest discussing on i18n
<tomayac> The Issue in question: https://
tomayac: we can wait WAM for their solution and reuse their solution
yongjing: I noticed that xfq had some comments
yongjing: It is better to have alignment of both groups (Web Manifest & MiniApps)
xfq: maybe also with the i18n WG
xfq: AFAIK WAM hasn't solved this as well
yongjing: What are the steps to move ahead the document?
xfq: I'll initiate the process to move the document status
xfq: if we have a group decision to request transition
yongjing: Any objection to publish it as FPWD?
Canfeng_Chen: any differences between the current ED and the CG draft?
Canfeng_Chen: are they the same?
xfq: the spec template and the editors are different
xfq: the spec content is the same
xfq: we have a few pending PRs though
Canfeng_Chen: how shall we deal with the pending PRs?
yongjing: we can discuss them today
martin: for Packaging
… all the old content in the CG draft is there
… I updated the format and the structure of the document to be more aligned with other W3C standards
… added some algorithms
… the content is the same
… this is what I did with packaging
yongjing: that's for packaging, right?
martin: yes
yongjing: we can publish the spec as is
… or if we can agree some of the PRs today we can merge them before publishing
xfq: We should solve the ReSpec errors, at least
xfq: other PRs are optional
Lifecycle
QingAn: I probably need two months to work on the Web IDL
QingAn: and publish FPWD after working on Web IDL
yongjing: any comments?
[silence]
Addressing
Dan_Zhou: addressing is not going well currently
… there are some offline discussions
… not written down yet
… maybe we need another month to talk about issues
yongjing: agreed
… we agreed to use https but the current spec is still the old one
Widget Requirements
Yongjing: what about Widget Requirements?
… Canfeng?
Canfeng_Chen: the editor of this document is Yinli Chen
… I need to discuss with him
… I will give you an update after the meeting
Issues and PRs
yongjing: Moving to next topic: open issues and PRs
xfq: each person has 5-10' to explain their issue or PR
https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-manifest/pull/11
xfq: need to fix the broken links before publishing the spec
yongjing: any objection on this PR (#11)?
xfq: I had a few comments
[xfq explains his comments]
yongjing: How we should proceed for the PR approval process?
… for group consensus.
… 1) two editors approving the proposal, or
… 2) Open discussion and approval during the meeting (like today)
xfq: For editorial changes the editor can just merge
yongjing: Any objection on approve the PR#11?
[silence]
https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-manifest/pull/13
https://
https://
yongjing: Next PR#13: Naming issue
Zitao_Wang: MiniApp manifest members now follow the W3C's guidelines.
… I follow these W3C guidelines to make these changes.
… json_case instead of camelCase
yongjing: are you Ok with the change, xfq?
xfq: the change looks good to me, but we also need to update the explainer and the JSON schema.
Zitao_Wang: I'd love to
yongjing: Any other comments?
… Should we update these changes on the same PR?
xfq: yes
https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-manifest/pull/12
Zitao_Wang: Included reference to support i18n.
… xfq sent some comments
… I understand his concerns
… we also need to see PWA's solution
yongjing: we can coordinate with the WebApps WG
Zitao_Wang: Should I explain my proposal, briefly?
… In the comments there are some examples of my proposal.
… Using i18n string resources like "$string:description_application"
[Zitao explains his proposal]
<tomayac> Again the pointer to https://
Zitao_Wang: JSON-based files with i18n resources. The manifest property would indicate the JSON object key in a map of resources.
yongjing: Comments? We can discuss it later (on the PR).
https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-packaging/pull/8
martin: I did a lot of changes to Packaging
… as I mentioned before
… I took all the content from the CG draft
… and changed the structure to meet the format of most of the W3C specs
… added a new section for MiniApp terminology (e.g., root directory)
… what is a MiniApp package
… describe the container
… basic proposal
… included a proper section about how to process the package
… how to fetch and run the package in the user agent
… there are a lot of inline issues
… the major changes are the security and privacy aspects
… included a mechanism to to include one, one or several digital signatures in a MiniApp Package
… of course, this all should be discussed by the WG members
… this should be flexible
… this proposal doesn't recommend any specific signature schema or any encoding or encryption mechanism
… open to any kind of potential solution
… you can see how we process the package
… I described the algorithms using the WHATWG's Infra Standard
… if you like this we can start fill in all the gaps and missing parts
… feel free to comment or update the PR
… happy to schedule 1:1 calls with you to discuss it
yongjing: thanks martin
… any comments?
tengyuan: I talked about some details with martin
… we will add more details about package processing in the following month
yongjing: can we use this as a baseline for us to work on
… or do you want to refine the PR?
martin: @@
yongjing: it's good that you have done the restructuring
… if there's no objection I would propose to use it as a baseline of the packaging spec
xfq: do you mean that we merge this PR?
yongjing: yes
tengyuan: we can use it as a baseline
… need more work later
yongjing: about manifest
… I propose to merge the editorial PR for manifest
… and publish it as FPWD
… any objections?
Resolution: publish manifest as FPWD
Rule of PR acceptance
yongjing: as discussed earlier today
… 1) two editors approving the proposal, or
… 2) Open discussion and approval during the meeting (like today)
… For editorial changes the editor can just merge
CJK meeting preparation
https://
https://
xfq: discussed in the CG meeting
xfq: propose to divide the event in different topic-oriented sessions
xfq: four topics
xfq: Ecosystem, Technical Architecture, Frameworks, and New Scenarios
xfq: need a chair for each topic
xfq: no feedback from the Japanese and Korean companies yet
xfq: invite you to submit your questions in advance of the live discussion
https://
<tomayac> FYI, I have uploaded my mini apps talk to YouTube: https://
<julien> I think for the next CJK meeting my teammates in Japan can prepare something (sorry for this time I didn’t know about it)
yongjing: the event is on w3.org
WG landing page info
https://
yongjing: one thing
yongjing: we can add teleconference meeting info
yongjing: won't having F2F for a long time
Canfeng_Chen: can the agenda be public?
xfq: agenda is public
xfq: call info is not public
xfq: I can add a link to https://
Yongjing: we can also add a link to join the WG
xfq: good suggestion, I can add it
Next teleconference time
yongjing: I would like to give thanks to all the participants of this call.
xfq: We agreed to have the WG meeting one week after the CG meeting
yongjing: 29th is fine?
… Agreed
AOB
Canfeng_Chen: in the meeting minutes, can you add links to all pending PRs to the five specs?
… it's easier for us to judge whether the specs are mature enough for FPWD
xfq: I can do that
Pending PRs
Lifecycle
[none]
Manifest
https://
https://
Packaging
https://
https://
Addressing
[none]
Widget Requirements
[none]