Meeting minutes
present Daniel
IDL and table generation
IDL and table generation
pkra: more specifically w3c/
<Rahim_> https://
Rahim_: this PR included table changes.
… jamesC commented asking if the table information could be generated from the IDL.
… but I don't know how that would work.
… seems like it could make things more robust.
… but not sure if it's feasible
pkra: sounds really interesting. Would need to work on the aria.js, I think. And that's still a mess.
… we spoke about something json-like to generate tables from to make things more robust
… IDL is good data.
spectranaut_: same. sounds good but non-trivial.
Rahim_: I think the presentation in HTML land is quite nice.
… I will try to talk to Anne about how HTML does it.
… I'll open a new issue and follow up there.
pkra: great.
Rahim_: fyi I have followed up with salesforce people to talk about their polyfill.
… safari TP also has things behind a flag. Hopefully we can land it soon.
board backlog review
pkra: let's start with 1804.
jamesn: I don't remember what this was about.
spectranaut_: let's close this.
pkra: done.
… next is 1807. better changelogs
jamesn: I think this is done.
daniel: is this about the monorepo gh problem?
pkra: that's 2238.
jamesn: yes, that's the respec change
Daniel: I saw there was a comment on that.
jamesn: I don't have time for it right now
Daniel: I'll see if I can find time when we publish next
pkra: let's close and point to 2238
… next is 2514
spectranaut_: right, we should get to that.
Daniel: we might want to find another way to signal this.
jamesn: is there not a standard we can copy from other specs?
Daniel: yes but the only allowed prose is something like "this version is intended to add new features".
… if we chose something like "expected to have new features" this might work.
jamesn: do we have other examples?
Daniel: I can link to some examples./
jamesn: would be good to match.
Daniel: it's basically "will it (not) be updated"
pkra: next up 2436.
… documenting deprecation
spectranaut_: I have it on my todo list. Just not very high up.
pkra: next 2496. process for css features
spectranaut_: should we have this on TPAC?
jamesn: sounds good.
… let's tag it for F2F. But we need something first.
pkra: next is 2475. CI for preventing respec failures
Daniel: this is one of mine.
… right now, I basically only know on merge if there's a problem.
… but there's tooling to check it.
… it's another layer. but I think it might be worth it.
jamesn: does prettier help at all?
Daniel: not really. It's the source markup combined with build markup.
pkra: next up is 1263.
… one of mine. I'm aware.
jamesn: looks mostly done.
pkra: next is 2521. another one of mine.
… scott had started a PR. I promised to wrap it up.
… next is 2552
Daniel: I haven't got to it yet.
… same for the next one
pkra: last one is 1905
jamesn: I had a draft PR. It went too far.
… daniel, you were going to update respec on that?
Daniel: yes. It's trickier, they build from their wikis.
netflify previews
Daniel: just fyi, I've been working on an update. IT should give us diffs.
pkra: nice!