Meeting minutes
Manifest
Algorithms for processing the manifest
https://
https://
Wenli: martin has sent a PR
Wenli: merged
Wenli: can we close this issue?
xfq: haven't seem the algorithms in detail
xfq: there are some references to WAM
martin: what I did was trying to define each manifest members
… based on the extension point
… including the existing algorithm of Manifest
… also linking refs to original specs
… align the algorithms
xiaoqian: I have a question for Martin
xiaoqian: it seems you have done a very good job to refer to Web App Manifest
… do you think it would be helpful to request review from the WAM editors
… to see if it's a good way to refer to their algorithms and definitions
… or do you think we can ask their review for like every three months?
… or do you think we should ask for their review for this specific pull request
… one of the Web App Manifest editors is part of the W3C Team now
… he would be willing to help
martin: we should ask for review
… about whether the current way is the best way to link to and to extend Web App Manifest
… how to use the Infra Standard
… how to link to the algorithms
… if you agree I'll ask them to have a high-level review to our spec
… will contact them
xiaoqian: sounds great
xiaoqian: he is also the maintainer of ReSpec, which is one of our spec tooling
<martin> thanks, I'll ask them
yongjing: sorry to jump in
yongjing: I have a question
yongjing: we resolved to publish FPWD
yongjing: the Director has approved it
yongjing: status of FPWD?
xfq: publication moratorium this week
xfq: I'll be on vacation next week
xfq: so I'll publish it in mid-May
i18n
wenli: i18n
… any comments from Yongjing?
martin: I think it's still under discussion
martin: we had some input to WAM
… AFAIK there is no final conclusion
… I think we need more time to align with Web App Manifest
… it's important
… we should continue to discuss this
wenli: we will continue to discuss this offline
… anything else we should talk about manifest?
martin: most open issues in Manifest are related to i18n
Packaging
wenli: packaging
… names of the platforms
https://
xfq: it's just for refs
martin: in the while, I corrected the names in the specs per xfq's suggestion
Wenli: any other topic we should discuss?
TPAC early planning
https://
Yongjing: TPAC
Yongjing: until 10 September we should fill in the tables with our preferred meeting dates and time
Yongjing: any suggestions from xiaoqian or xfq?
xiaoqian: at this stage the W3C Events Team would like to know what groups will meet at TPAC
Yongjing: I would assume that we need some slots
Yongjing: we may have some interop tests/demos and early implementations to show
xiaoqian: if we would like to have conversations with the i18n WG or other groups it would be a great opportunity to have joint meetings
Yongjing: we can have a joint meeting with WebApps WG and perhaps Publishing@W3C
xiaoqian: the meeting can be 2 hours to 2 days
… depending on the group
Yongjing: in a F2F we can sit together dome some PlugFest
… how can we do that in a virtual meeting?
… maybe do some pre-recording?
xiaoqian: too early to discuss this
… we make a few months
… we can discuss it when we start implementing the specs
xfq: last year was also virtual
… the Immersive Web WG/CG made video demos
https://
martin: absolutely good ideas
… maybe also showcase of miniapp work in breakout sessions
… and PlugFest like the WoT groups
Screen Orientation
https://
xiaoqian: angel told me Alibaba is interested in Screen Orientation
… the W3C spec is not a REC yet
… implemented in browsers
… need to fix a few bugs
… I wonder if the MiniApp vendors are interested
https://
<tomayac> Yes, "orientation"
<tomayac> Defined here https://
<tomayac> Web App Manifest allows for enums as defined in https://
<tomayac> The meaning of the enums is defined here https://
QingAn: the screen orientation of a device can change from landscape to portrait
… not sure if defining it in the manifest is enough
… it's static
… we should define some events to be informed when the screen orientation changes
… which is dynamic
<Angel> maybe we should discuss this idea in the CG?
Yongjing: thank you for the requirement
Yongjing: we can think about if we should include it in the UI component work
Yongjing: you can file a GitHub issue
… we can discuss it in the issue
xiaoqian: question for the group
… for this kind of events
Action: Anqing to provide the details of screen events API in the github issue
<trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.
xiaoqian: where should we specify them?
Yongjing: I think it's more related to UI aspects
… but we'll see
xiaoqian: if you define this kind of events
… if would be great if we can try our best to align with the Screen Orientation API in the WebApps WG
… it's actually quite stable
… but it's a working draft
Yongjing: of course
AOB
Wenli: any other topic?
xiaoqian: after FPWD
… I suggest that we request for horizontal reviews
… a11y, security, privacy, i18n, TAG
yongjing: yes, but these issues are not resolved yet
<Angel> +1 to express concern about the maturity of the specs for H review
xiaoqian: that's why we do wide review
xiaoqian: If we request too late, the cost of modifying the spec will become higher
xfq: getting early review is very important
xfq: next meeting
<Angel> fine with May 27
xfq: May 27, same time
[Adjourned]