IRC log of interop on 2023-09-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

06:43:40 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #interop
06:43:44 [RRSAgent]
logging to
06:43:44 [tidoust]
Chair: James Graham
06:43:44 [tidoust]
06:43:44 [tidoust]
clear agenda
06:43:46 [tidoust]
agenda+ Pick a scribe
06:43:50 [tidoust]
agenda+ Reminders: code of conduct, health policies, recorded session policy
06:43:52 [tidoust]
agenda+ Goal of this session
06:43:54 [tidoust]
agenda+ Discussion
06:43:56 [tidoust]
agenda+ Next steps / where discussion continues
06:49:46 [tidoust]
RRSAgent, do not leave
06:49:46 [tidoust]
RRSAgent, make logs public
07:20:14 [tidoust]
tidoust has joined #interop
07:24:10 [jgraham_]
jgraham_ has joined #interop
07:29:13 [shunya]
shunya has joined #interop
07:34:37 [rbyers]
rbyers has joined #interop
07:34:44 [patrickbrosset]
patrickbrosset has joined #interop
07:34:44 [bkardell_]
bkardell_ has joined #interop
07:35:16 [jgraham_]
Meeting: Interop
07:35:37 [jgraham_]
Chair: jgraham
07:35:40 [jgraham_]
RRSAgent: make minutes
07:35:41 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate jgraham_
07:35:48 [jgraham_]
RRSAgent: make logs public
07:36:39 [bkardell_]
07:37:09 [tidoust]
07:37:12 [jgraham_]
07:38:12 [Romain]
Romain has joined #interop
07:38:49 [charlieharrison]
charlieharrison has joined #interop
07:38:53 [orkon_]
orkon_ has joined #interop
07:39:00 [zcorpan]
zcorpan has joined #interop
07:39:04 [jgraham_]
ScribeNick: bkardell_
07:39:06 [rbyers]
07:39:10 [zcorpan]
07:39:18 [vmpstr]
vmpstr has joined #interop
07:39:18 [patrickbrosset]
07:39:19 [shunya]
07:39:21 [vmpstr]
07:39:24 [alexrudenko_]
alexrudenko_ has joined #interop
07:39:33 [past]
past has joined #interop
07:39:46 [rachelandrew]
07:39:50 [alexrudenko_]
07:40:21 [whimboo_]
whimboo_ has joined #interop
07:40:31 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: I have a small number of slides about what interop is... "What is interop: Metric measuring pass rate of a curated selection of wpt... not very interesting
07:40:36 [past]
07:40:37 [whimboo_]
07:41:19 [mrobinson]
mrobinson has joined #interop
07:41:20 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: why is interop is a more interesting question... we have lots of historic test failures and each browser is failing unique ones in many cases -- it's hard to know which ones to pick up/prioritize
07:41:35 [gsnedders_web]
gsnedders_web has joined #interop
07:41:47 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: there wasn't a way to really include end users or have discussions among browsers around how to do this prioritization
07:41:52 [marie]
marie has joined #interop
07:42:27 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: the point of interop is that it gives us a means of identifying interop priorities, clear metrics, makes it easy to communicate with developers and helps ensure users have a good experience on the web
07:42:33 [ddbeck]
ddbeck has joined #interop
07:43:45 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: the next obvious question is "How do you decide priorities"... there's various criteria we can use, and we can talk about what that was like for 2023/2024... broadly though: If we know things are broken for end users, or iff we're getting reports about pain from developers because of lack of interop...
07:43:59 [miriam]
07:44:02 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: it could be that it has lots of stack overflow questions, or high use counters, etc
07:45:05 [marie]
07:45:11 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: 2023 had lots of focus areas (20?) - you can see that we have scores for the major browser engine browsers _and_ we have this interop score which measures the intersection that is passing on all because, again, browsers can fail unique tests
07:45:51 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: we also have investigation areas, which can be for example, non-standards work that can allow us to achieve interop in the future - this year we looked into better how to test mobile and a11y
07:46:05 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: so we have some graphs, "up and to the right" - that looks like victory
07:46:50 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: so we're getting ready to announce interop 2024... If you're thinking "Is {thing I am interested in} a viable candidate"? here are some criteria
07:47:33 [mrobinson]
07:47:45 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: it has to have a mature spec, on a standards track... It has to have good automated test coverage (preferably in wpt), and have posititive signals of cross-vendor support... it's not a venue to force browsers to implement something
07:48:45 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: so if it is widely implemented but has poor interop, if it is an upcomming/partially implemented feature that has very high developer interest
07:48:49 [bkardell_]
(container queiries/has/aspect ratio are examples)
07:49:12 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: or features that you can make the case would markedly improve the web for some or all users (for example, a11y)
07:49:26 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: sept 14 we will send out a call for proposals (tomorrow_)
07:49:50 [fscholz]
fscholz has joined #interop
07:50:04 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: it will be on github (will ammend the slide to add the url)... The call will be open until october 4... questions? things you want to discuss?
07:50:08 [vmpstr]
07:50:10 [vmpstr]
07:50:14 [zcorpan]
GitHub link:
07:50:34 [zcorpan]
ack vmpstr
07:50:47 [ntim]
ntim has joined #interop
07:50:58 [bkardell_]
vmpstr: It's a great yearly cadence effort -- what is your sense of projects that could be bigger than 1 year... could they fit?
07:51:38 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: at some level anything bigger than a year has to be broken down into a series of smaller project. It seems completely reasonable we could add things along the way that could be parts of interop for multiple years... Did you have a specific example ?
07:52:03 [bkardell_]
vmpstr: we're working on view transitions -- we're estimating it's probably more than 1 year, and it seems hard to break it down
07:52:11 [Romain]
color and colorspaces is already a multi-year focus area
07:52:53 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: if the estimate is that it is going to take more than a year, I guess the best thing would be to get people to start and then we can add it in the fture
07:52:53 [zcorpan]
07:53:21 [bkardell_]
ntim: yeah, we are adding things from color spaces along the way
07:53:43 [ntim]
main point is that color spaces can be broken down
07:53:44 [jgraham_]
ack zcorpan
07:53:52 [bkardell_]
rnyman: {? was looking for nick}
07:54:38 [bkardell_]
zcorpan: We can also sometimes start it and then they can carry over...
07:54:50 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: there is ongoing discussion about how that will work because we may not finish and what happens, we also have new stuff - how do we decide if we are finished.
07:54:51 [patrickbrosset]
07:54:59 [andreubotella]
andreubotella has joined #interop
07:55:12 [jgraham_]
ack patrickbrosset
07:55:18 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: Especially if you have things like necessary engine refactors as a prerew
07:55:37 [bkardell_]
patrickbrosset: If there are more proposals, what's the selection process
07:57:22 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: the fundamental process is concensus based. All of the participating orgs have to agree we will accept something in interop. In previous years we've just used that directly... This year we're going to try somtehing a lot more specific about how proposals come in and get filtered out more easily.. Asking for supporting evidence and things that filter out. You're not required to provide all of it. Then at that point individual
07:57:22 [bkardell_]
members can go try to individually organize them by whatever criteria
07:58:17 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: then we sort of merge those lists and find agreement and then try to decide a cutoff point where we agree we can reasonably make very good process. It's not to come up with a global ordered list, but at least a common list we can agree is high priority
07:58:22 [bkardell_]
07:58:29 [jgraham_]
ack bkardell_
07:58:51 [rbyers]
[takes over scribing]
07:58:53 [zcorpan_]
zcorpan_ has joined #interop
07:59:08 [lea]
lea has joined #interop
07:59:31 [rbyers]
bkardell: We've had lots of conversations on exactly this. Difficult to explain - we have 100 tasks, are they all good tasks? Could say yes. But if I say "you have one year what can you get done" you can't pick 100. Why did you pick A, B,C. instead of D,E,F
07:59:54 [rbyers]
It's complicated. Reasonable people can disagree. People trying to do our best. Not a global list, but an intersection of lists we can all agree are good and common and achievable.
08:00:09 [rbyers]
I hope that when developers submit things, we're able to somehow communicate that.
08:00:22 [rbyers]
Hopefully everyone in the room understands that and helps explain it
08:00:36 [rbyers]
I know folks submit something and it doesn't get chosen ....
08:00:37 [cathiechen]
cathiechen has joined #interop
08:00:44 [rbyers]
08:01:21 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: (shows proposal template ongithub)
08:01:47 [rbyers]
[scribing back to Brian]
08:03:50 [jgraham_]
ack rbyers
08:05:23 [bkardell_]
rbyers: One pattern I see is: obviously not everything can make it in... I worry about how we talk about interop. There are people on the chrome team who might say "we have an interop problem" but it doesn't make itinto interop 2023, so it doesn't matter... You have to be careful how you say that because it's not what we mean to say... Do you agree there are things that are important for interop that wont make itinto interop 2024?
08:05:29 [bkardell_]
zcorpan_: yes
08:05:32 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: yes
08:05:33 [bkardell_]
bkardell_: yes
08:05:38 [bkardell_]
everyone: yes
08:07:04 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: Yes we have a years long interop problem -- css zoom, it can't make it into interop just now, but it is hugely impoprtant... or editing APIs... they are super important but they aren't currently in a place we could accept them
08:08:37 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: there are definitely things that we can't put in here currently -- having the investigation areas are a little bit of a way to include _some_ of those things, but we just can't fit everything. Even just given resource constraints -- there are many reasons, we don't have good tests for it. Maybe we should be more intentoional when we talk about it, because it is certianly true
08:08:49 [lea]
is there any way to identify these kinds of "future interop" opportunities a) so that they don't fall off the radar and b) to get consensus and prioritize?
08:09:06 [bkardell_]
rbyers: one thing I am seeing/fighting against is that people on the chrome team might be getting the idea if it doesn't make it in here it isn't as important. I worry it could cause us to _lessen_ our investment in interop somehow because it chnages our conception
08:09:46 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: I think at the moment there isn't much communication - the standards bodies focus on the idea of what they are interested in but there isnt a more whole web platform narrative and thinking on priorities
08:10:10 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: it could be interesting to see how we take some of htose things like css zoom and could articulate something helpful
08:11:03 [bkardell_]
rnyman: The first year it was much smaller number of vendors, and since we have grown it in terms of collecting and giving thought to the priortization -- we now have more information and an easy grab bag we can use to go beyond this
08:11:26 [ntim]
ntim has joined #interop
08:12:16 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: to lea's question... like css zoom you shouldn't submit that because it doesn't meet the basis of the criteria. Last year we didn't articulate that well enough perhaps and we had too many proposals and we spent too much of people's time on things we shouldn't have been considering. Last year there were > 80 proposals
08:13:13 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: and you have to take them to your engineering teams and that takes a lot of time that then they're not doing the actual engineering work... So we are trying to focus on making this more efficient, so it's very interesating that something like css zoom would be immediately filtered out, but it is interesting somehow...
08:13:13 [andreubotella]
08:14:14 [bkardell_]
lea: I guess the question is it doesn't meet the baseline criteria today, but will it tomorrow? What if there is a way to post something not for today but for future consideration... I'm not really submitting it for this year's interop
08:15:04 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: that could be itneresting, a kind of holding area... the obvious worry is it becomes just another bug tracker that hasn't been triaged/prioritized... but between what you and rbyers said there is I think something there... It would be good to have something
08:15:22 [bkardell_]
lea: you mentioned these areas are already known - is there an FAQ somewhere or something?
08:15:52 [zcorpan_]
08:15:54 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: no, it mostly exists in people's heads - it's a big list of bugs people know exist - places where we've heard about pains, etc.
08:15:56 [jgraham_]
ack andreubotella
08:16:20 [andreubotella]
08:16:31 [bkardell_]
andreubotella: how does the list of investigation focus areas differ?
08:16:43 [zcorpan_]
ack zcorpan_
08:17:32 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: standards work needs to happen in standards bodies - the interop project isn't that. CSS Zoom has work that needs to happen in the CSS working group, because it's not just implementation, it's spec issues. It would be maybe problematic to demand the CSS WG work at a certain pace
08:18:01 [bkardell_]
andreubotella: but the interop project has some importance or influence, could it help press the css working group
08:18:02 [gsnedders_web]
Also some concern about the work happening around the Interop project instead of in the WG where there's an IPR policy.
08:18:45 [bkardell_]
ntim: I dont think we want to fall into the trap of making interop a standards body.. We had a bunch of investigation areas about SVG, for example that belong to an SVG working group
08:18:58 [kadirtopal_]
kadirtopal_ has joined #interop
08:19:05 [bkardell_]
ntim: we also have things to improve a11y testing or mobile testing
08:19:07 [bkardell_]
08:19:28 [fscholz]
fscholz has joined #interop
08:19:57 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: yes, I think the thing to do with investigations is that it's for things that aren't immediately actionable, but aren't standards work... but it is similar people involved and so I assume there is influece through simple osmosis
08:19:59 [bkardell_]
08:20:40 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: maybe there is a way of documenting these things better... I dont think theinvestigation areas are that
08:20:44 [bkardell_]
bkardell_: agree
08:21:18 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: The simple fact that we have this project does sort of raise some awareness of these
08:21:22 [zcorpan_]
08:21:29 [jgraham_]
ack zcorpan_
08:22:28 [bkardell_]
Zakim: I think there's maybe a misperception with the interop project. The features that are in aren't ncessarily the most important features... They are the issues that aren't interoperable and needs a push.. Features become interoperable all the time just because we do a good job. Features in JS do a fair job of just being interoperable, for example.
08:22:39 [bkardell_]
08:23:13 [bkardell_]
zcorpan_: So this project really came about because of places where we failed to do that. If your feature isn't in theinterop project that could be a success
08:24:07 [fscholz]
What happens after a feature was an interop focus area? I assume we send a strong signal to web devs that the thing is now usuable/stable? Do we know if features see larger adoption thanks to interop? Is there less frustration with certain features?
08:24:34 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: there are also some kind of different critera. Like container queries went in as soon as we had agreement becauase we could see that it is univerally desired/important - and we want to make sure that it launches closer and well coordinated/highly interoperable from day one and not a ragged, frustrating several years and then a real interop problem for some time
08:25:16 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: subgrid is a bit like that... subgrid was in firefox for a long time, but now it's coming along in other browsers and we can see firefox has some interoperability bugs
08:25:18 [zcorpan]
zcorpan has joined #interop
08:27:41 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: to fscholz that's a good question. So far there haven't been a lot of things ... in 2022 I think there were 15 focus areas and like 5 we didn't carry over... it wasn't big stuff, sticky positioning I think. WE haven't tried to do the analysis "did this have an impact"... it's hard to have a really good control for that kind of experiment - you'd want a feature which wasn't in interop that year... I'm not sure how you would
08:27:41 [bkardell_]
design that experiment. We know there were bad cases in history where we don't want to repeat
08:28:13 [bkardell_]
jgraham_: there will be big features that maybe could provide stronger evidence for pre/post interop
08:28:19 [Romain]
Getting this feedback could be part of the state of CSS survey? Likely this data is already gathered.
08:29:41 [andreubotella]
andreubotella has left #interop
09:01:00 [tidoust]
tidoust has joined #interop
09:02:35 [past]
past has joined #interop
09:06:09 [jgraham_]
RRSAgent: make minutes
09:06:10 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate jgraham_
09:06:16 [jgraham_]
Zakim, bye
09:06:16 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees have been bkardell_, tidoust, jgraham_, rbyers, zcorpan, patrickbrosset, shunya, vmpstr, rachelandrew, alexrudenko_, past, whimboo_,
09:06:16 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #interop
09:06:16 [Zakim]
... miriam, marie, mrobinson
09:09:49 [past_]
past_ has joined #interop
09:15:47 [past]
past has joined #interop
10:48:18 [past]
past has joined #interop
12:05:13 [tidoust]
tidoust has joined #interop