- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:08:19 -0500
- To: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
The minutes from the January 29 Widgets voice conference are
available at the following and copied below:
<http://www.w3.org/2009/01/29-wam-minutes.html>
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webapps mail list before 5 February 2009 (the next
Widgets voice conference); otherwise these minutes will be considered
Approved.
-Regards, Art Barstow
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Widgets Voice Conference
29 Jan 2009
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009JanMar/0227.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2009/01/29-wam-irc
Attendees
Present
Art, Arve, Andy, Jere, Mark, Bryan, Marcos, Benoit, Mike
Regrets
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Review and tweak agenda
2. [6]Announcements
3. [7]Requirements for Window modes:
4. [8]Renaming "thumbnail" to "screenshot"?
5. [9]SVG dependency
6. [10]File extension and MIME mapping
7. [11]Zip files and Encoding:
8. [12]API and Events spec: getting to FPWD:
9. [13]Proposal to change VC time to one hour earlier
* [14]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<marcos> bb in 2 mins
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
Date: 29 January 2009
<Bryan> Bryan is here, on chat only
Review and tweak agenda
AB: any change requests?
... agenda is
[15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/02
27.html
[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009JanMar/0227.html
[None]
Announcements
AB: Andy, brief intro please
<Benoit> p
Andy: with Sony Ericsson for over 2 years;
... work with North America operators
... I work with Web technologies
... trying to get my bearings wrt to W3C
AB: Marcos mentioned in IRC today there will be Mobile Widget
Workshop
... in Madrid this April as part of WWW2009.
... For details see
[16]http://www.research.att.com/~rjana/mobea2009.htm
... Deadline is Feb 12 for papers
... It's not really an announcement per se but a forward pointer to
the AOB agenda item I want to talk about moving this call to one
hour earlier on a permanent basis.
... does anyone have any other short announcements they'd like to
make?
[16] http://www.research.att.com/~rjana/mobea2009.htm
[None]
Requirements for Window modes:
AB: last week our discussion about window modes started to "rat
hole" in that we were conflating a few different concepts
... Mark agreed to create some requirements
... Action-291: [17]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/291
... Mark, what is the status?
[17] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/291
MP: I've had some internal discussions but nothing yet to share with
the group
... there were some additional comments on the list and I haven't
followed them yet
... will be next week before I can address this action
AB: ok; please let's continue this discussion
Arve: how does this effect P&C 1.0
MC: I'm not sure at this point
... I think we have general consensus on the names
... but we still need to discuss the related process model for each
name
Arve: would we need to go back to WD or a 2nd LCWD
AB: I don't know the answer
<scribe> ACTION: barstow if we make significant changes to P&C LC,
do we need to go back to WD? [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2009/01/29-wam-minutes.html#action01]
MS: there is no hard and fast rule here
... we can resolve this now
... we don't have to go back unnecessarily
AB: I think it's a bit premature to make a resolution on this
... any comments on that?
MC: I agree; we should think about this in a week or two and see how
much the spec changes
AB: I think that's a reasonable way forward
... any disagreements?
[None]
Renaming "thumbnail" to "screenshot"?
AB: Marcos raised this issue via
<[19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/0
174.html>
... I don't recall much support for the proposal
... Marcos, what's the status?
[19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009JanMar/0174.html%3E
MC: I think it makes sense to change it to screenshot
Arve: neither proposal is particuarly acurate description of the
image
MC: what is the role of the image?
Arve: the image varies a lot
... the image is displayed to provide information
<Benoit> As a user's perspective then in gallery it would make sens
to use the word screenshot
Arve: an image can have multiple roles
... OTOH, I don't think this is a big deal
MC: I'd like to go with screenshot
BS: I agree with Marcos
JK: want to understand the purpose of the image
... thumbnail is used within the device e.g. in a gallery
... that's different than an image on a web site
AB: Mark, is this topic something you will include in your input for
the window mode action
MP: no, I wasn't
... see them as separate
MC: I will refine the requirements re thumbnails, etc in the Reqs
doc
AB: so will you let us know when that is done?
MC: yes
SVG dependency
AB: Boris raised an issue regarding the P&C spec's SVG dependency
... See
<[20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/0
212.html>
... since then, Doug Schepers has responded
... See
[21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/02
33.html
... Marcos, what's the status?
[20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009JanMar/0212.html%3E
[21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009JanMar/0233.html
MC: Boris' viewpoint is correct
... I was looking at it differently
... Conformance checker and author reqs are different
... Doug mentioned a bunch of different capabilities of SVG
... he recommends we recommend a subset of SVG
Arve: has anyone defined such a profile already?
MC: no and I think it would be painful to do so
... we'd have to tell authors not to use certain elements for
example
... and get into spec'ing behavior diffs
AB: I think we need more information/data from implementors of the
Widget UA
JK: could we use MIME type to help?
Arve: all profiles today include some features we may not want to
support
AB: my recommendation is we continue to discuss this on the public
mail list
MC: I think we shold drop SVG icon format for v1
Arve: I would expect some operators to require SVG icon format
AB: there's an action for everyone to talk to the impl teams and
bring back some data to help inform this decision
Arve: some functionality like scripting we don't want to support
... there are other things we also don't want to have to support
... the SVG WG can help us understand if there is some way to say
particualar features are not supported
<scribe> ACTION: Barstow followup with Doug and Mike to coordinate
this issue with the SVG WG [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2009/01/29-wam-minutes.html#action02]
Arve: I think Erik is a co-Chair
MS: we can include Cameron too as he is the other co-Chair
File extension and MIME mapping
AB: Boris raised an issue re file extensions and MIME mapping
... see
<[23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/0
173.html>
... Marcos, what's the essence of the issue?
[23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009JanMar/0173.html%3E
MC: we understand this is an issue
... we can work with Hixie and at least someone else on an Internet
Draft
... He thinks we need a robust table of mappings
... I think we already have such a table
... We also need to consider the security implications
<MikeSmith>
[24]http://webblaze.cs.berkeley.edu/2009/mime-sniff/mime-sniff.txt
[24] http://webblaze.cs.berkeley.edu/2009/mime-sniff/mime-
sniff.txt
JK: so you aren't interested in a manifest within the package to
address this
MC: no widget engine has needed it so far
... thus I'm not convinced we need it
... I can put it in; just follow Apache
<MikeSmith>
[25]http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff-00
[25] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff-00
MC: There is a risk of hijacking
AB: could we push this manifest to v2?
MC: yes; if it isn't on the v2 list then I will add it
AB: what's the next step then Marcos
MC: I think we need impl feedback
AB: so we could go to Candidate with the table essentially as is and
see if implementors raise Red Flags?
MC: yes
Zip files and Encoding:
AB: I think the main issue is that ZIP files aren't particularly
portable from OS to OS
... Marcos wrote about it in his blog:
<[26]http://datadriven.com.au/2008/12/08/zip-files-and-encoding-i-ha
te-you/>
... I think one of the questions for us is basically - what, if
anything, we need to do about this beyond what we've already
spec'ed.
... Marcos, WDYT?
[26] http://datadriven.com.au/2008/12/08/zip-files-and-encoding-
i-hate-you/%3E
MC: I don't think is going to be a huge problem
... I think developers will understand the problem and deal with it
... The only "real" solution is ZIP being standardized in some place
like ISO
... I don't think we want to wait for that.
AB: comemnts?
JK: could mandate UTF-8 for filenames
Arve: yes we could mandate that but the tools that are used may not
be able to support that
... I don't think we want to mandate special tools
... We have some agreed Design Goals about re-use of existing tools,
specs, etc.
... We must make authoring as simple as possible
MC: I agree with the Arve's comments
AB: so we could address this by taking Jere's recommendation but it
would result in some issues with authoring
JK: there could be a conformance service that helps normalize this
issue
... e.g. it is used before a Widget is deployed
Arve: I don't think adding that into the process pipeline will work
in practice
MC: I think the best we can do is warn authors about this and we
already do that
... we recommend UTF8 but can't mandate it
API and Events spec: getting to FPWD:
AB: I submitted some comments to Arve via IRC earlier this week and
I believe Arve has addressed them all
... see [27]http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/webapps/20090127
... Arve has made additional edits
<[28]http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/>
... Arve, what's the status?
[27] http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/webapps/20090127
[28] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/%3E
Arve: I've received a bunch of comments; thanks All!
... I think I have addressed every comment I have received
... check v1.8
... Still no Refs or Acks sections
AB: I propose we agree this document is ready for a FPWD
... any objections?
[None]
RESOLUTION: the API and Events spec is ready for FPWD
AB: thanks Arve and Marcos
... ACTION: barstow submit paperwork to publish FPWD of APIs and
Events spec
Proposal to change VC time to one hour earlier
AB: changing the VC time is always a tough issue because there is no
real win-win here all of our world wide participants.
... nevertheless, are there any objections to moving the VC time to
one hour earlier?
<Bryan> One hour earlier conflicts with UWA
AB: Bryan, that is a real bummer
<Bryan> It's a problem for me, but I guess I can switch off
AB: Bryan, what does "switch off" mean?
<Bryan> Alternate
AB: Bryan, do you object to this proposal?
<Bryan> No, just fyi
RESOLUTION: the new voice conference time moving forward will be one
hour earlier
AB: any other biz?
MC: I will not be on next week's call
AB: good luck next week with your PhD defense!
Benoit: any comments on the f2f document?
...
[29]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/images/3/3f/OrangeLab-Issy-v
enue.pdf
... any changes in attendance?
[29] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/images/3/3f/OrangeLab-
Issy-venue.pdf
AB: Arve changed to "likely"
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Barstow followup with Doug and Mike to coordinate this
issue with the SVG WG [recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2009/01/29-wam-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: barstow if we make significant changes to P&C LC, do
we need to go back to WD? [recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2009/01/29-wam-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]
Received on Thursday, 29 January 2009 16:10:27 UTC