W3C

– DRAFT –
MiniApps WG Call

24 June 2021

Attendees

Present
Aaron_Wentzel, angel, Changhao_Liang, Dan_Zhou, MartinAlvarez, QingAn, shuo_wang, tomayac, Wenli_Zhang, xfq, xiaoqian, Yan_Yumeng, Yongjing, Zitao_Wang
Regrets
-
Chair
Yongjing
Scribe
xfq, xiaoqian

Meeting minutes

Yongjing: review the deliverables
… Issues & PR discussion
… White paper maintenance
… Next teleconference time

Deliverables status review

Yongjing: we published manifest as FPWD
… also published MiniApp Lifecycle
… Packaging
… perhaps we can get conclusion at the end of this call
… to see if MiniApp Packaging is ready for FPWD
… the plan is to reach FPWD in Q2
… but we still have a few PRs under discussions

Addressing

https://raw.githack.com/Sharonzd/miniapp-addressing/main/index.html

https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-addressing/pulls

Dan_Zhou: the core change is the URI syntax part
… changed the Chinese text
… not in English yet
… I'll translate it and update the images
… hope you can give me some advice about the syntax

Yongjing: we can review it later
… any update on widget?

Issues & PR discussion

Yongjing: let's go through the issues and PRs

https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-manifest/pull/20

martin: old PR from May

[martin introduces the PR]

Yongjing: I reviewed this and approved it on GitHub
… any comments?
… I propose that we merge this PR

https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-manifest/pull/21

[zitao introduces the PR]

zitao: For min_platform_version, proposed to add a platform_version object, that contains min_platform_version, target_platform_version, and release_type

Yongjing: any comments from xfq?

xfq: LGTM

Yongjing: any other comments?
… I propose that we merge this PR

https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-manifest/pull/23

zitao: propose to add two attributes to support the selection of color mode and device types

QingAn: is there a plan to make a normative list of possible values in the manifest spec?

zitao: no, in order to make it more flexible
… to make it support current and future devices

Dan_Zhou: I think there should be a default mode for each miniapp
… I don't think this member is needed

zitao: I think it's optional

Dan_Zhou: ok
… I need more time to look at this proposal

Yongjing: I encourage group participants to look at this proposal and comment on github

https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-packaging/pull/26

martin: large PR

[martin introduces the PR]

martin: Simplification of algorithms
… added a note about file names
… follow the current status of the CSS standards
… several open issues
… like the markup language
… MiniApp vendors, please share your opinions
… please review https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-packaging/issues/27

Yongjing: I encourage group participants to look at #27 and provide feedback on github
… back to the PR
… I propose that we merge this PR

Addressing

https://raw.githack.com/Sharonzd/miniapp-addressing/main/index.html

Yongjing: back to Addressing
… we can discuss it but don't have to make decision today

Dan_Zhou: main difference is that there are two formats of URI
… first is custom scheme
platform://miniapp/foo
… second is https
… like https://platform.org/miniapp/foo
… using deep linking technology
… we can discuss it further after I translate it into English

Yongjing: I have some comments personally
… I understand that you're proposing two solutions
… but I remember most of the pushback was to the first solution
… it is generally not a good idea to invent a new scheme
… https is preferred
… I'm not sure if preserving the custom scheme is good

Dan_Zhou: we don't need to register the custom scheme in IANA

Yongjing: I understand that
… but there may be concerns about the custom scheme solution

Aaron_Wentzel: I share similar concerns

Aaron_Wentzel: curious what are the use cases requiring a custom scheme

Dan_Zhou: the legacy solution should also be supported

Other PR cleaning

https://github.com/w3c/miniapp/pulls

xfq: we can wait for the recharter regarding those two issues of the WG charter
… if there is a broken link, we can fix in place

<angel> +1 to handle the charter issue later

xfq: for those other editorial changes, we can leave it open

https://github.com/w3c/miniapp/pull/90

Yongjing: #90, opened long time ago
… seems outdated to me
… shall we close it?

Dan_Zhou: I'll ask Tengyuan for the status

https://github.com/w3c/miniapp/pull/9

xfq: #9, lgtm
… propose some new text about new page
… APIs about events
… components related APIs
… comments were about the terms

xiaoqian: PR opened by me
… will solve the conflict
… and ask the group to merge it

AOB

xfq: what's the plan for lifecycle?
… any issue before we go to wide review?

QingAn: three issues left
… I'll look into them
… let's see what comments we can get from the community

xfq: fyi, the i18n WG is working on a guide of developing localisable manifest

Yongjing: is it a joint-work with the WebApps manifest?

xfq: not yet, still an early draft

Yongjing: I think the web apps manifest has similar discussion about localisation
… and we are following those guidance
… if the i18n wg are also having conflicting specs
… it may case confusion
… but it's good that some professionals are handling these issues
… we can put our localisation issues on hold

Yongjing: there are some other important technical open issues

martin: we have discussion related topics in the CG
… about the UI components, what's our proposal
… I've opened a few issues
… maybe we can update our explainers in the CG

<martin> Some comments here : https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-packaging/issues/2#issuecomment-815619698

martin: to work with Open UI, and other similar framework

Yongjing: the file format of the page layout is also very critical
… the current implementation is not valid xml file
… we should think about whether we can change xml to html

Dan_Zhou: I suggest create a spec m-a-ml
… neither xml nor html can meet our need

Yongjing: do you have plan to work on it some time soon?

Dan_Zhou: we can start it soon

Yongjing: it can be challenging
… we should be prepared for the comments

Dan_Zhou: we can start from an explainer

martin: two comments about this open issue
… opt1. create a new mark-up
… a lot of new work and to-be-defined
… opt2. an extension of html
… discuss the specific need of mini app-ml
… I suggest we continue the discussion about the pos and cons in this thread

Yongjing: let's continue the discussion and see if we can find consensus

martin: it's just some suggestion to help find the best solution and to get help from other groups

Yongjing: next call, 29 July

<martin> Thank you!!

[adjourned]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 147 (Thu Jun 24 22:21:39 2021 UTC).