TPAC/2012/SessionIdeas

From W3C Wiki
< TPAC‎ | 2012
(Redirected from TPAC2012/SessionIdeas)

We encourage attendees to start brainstorming TPAC2012 session ideas in advance of the meeting. See the TPAC 2012 FAQ for more information.

Sessions You Volunteer to Do

Please provide:

    • session name (as a === subhead === )
    • session proposer (optional: name a desired session leader, can be yourself)
    • one sentence session summary
    • 1+ paragraph session description
    • type of session: (e.g.: talk, panel, open discussion, etc.)
    • additional speakers/panelists

And feel free to simply add them here at the top.

Responsive Images

Proposers: Marcos Cáceres, Yoav Weiss, Odin Hørthe Omdal.

This is a hot potato. Let's discuss.

As the number and varieties of high-density screens has increased (both on mobile and desktop devices), web developers have created custom techniques for serving images that best match a user's browsing environment. However, these techniques and polyfills have proven insufficient and problematic, so the developer community has turned to the W3C to help standardise a solution.

Topics:

Type: an open panel talk discussion.

People who have expressed interest: Tobie Langel, Tantek Çelik

APIs for Trusted Web Applications

Proposers: Dave Raggett, Daniel Appelquist, Wonsuk Lee

Web APIs have traditionally been developed to protect users visiting potentially untrusted websites, necessitating a cautious approach to security that limits what a particular website can do. There is an emerging interest in applying Web technologies for building Web applications with comparable capabilities to native applications. This requires stronger integration with the host platform than is the case for traditional web pages. The contrast between the two contexts can be illustrated by comparing a) an application with limited access to specific fields in the user's contacts, and b) an application that implements a contacts manager, where the application is entrusted with the ability to access, create, delete and update entries.

W3C has recently launched the System Applications Working Group to address the demand for APIs for trusted web applications. This group is only just getting started and it was too late to arrange a formal face to face meeting at this year's TPAC. This session is proposed as an informal meeting for people interested in this area who would like to learn about and discuss the direction to be covered by the SysApps WG.

People who have expressed interest: Tobie Langel, Art Barstow, Yosuke Funahashi, Sakari Poussa, Paul Bakaus, Wayne Carr, Tantek Çelik

Web and Broadcasting in The Time of Disaster: Lessons, Studies, and Future Actions

Proposer: Yosuke Funahashi

One topic that is gaining more and more attention from concerned stakeholders around the world involves lessons learned by media organizations during and after the Great East Japan Earthquake. To help clarify what needs to be done in the future, the media-related events below were held in Japan and organized by such stakeholders as IPTVF-J, W3C, the United Nations, the World Bank, Google and Twitter.

    • Disaster Information and Media session in Symposium on Web and TV 2012 (IPTVF-J, W3C) [report]
    • Big Tent Sendai: The Role of Technology in Disaster Preparedness and Relief (Google, the United Nations) [site]
    • Sendai Dialogue (the World Bank) [site]
    • Big Data Workshop on the Great East Japan Earthquake (Google, Twitter) [site]

I would like to present an executive summary of these events to give you an overview of the hot topics and follow that with a discussion on what the Web or web standards can do in this area.

Agenda:

    • Executive Summary:
      • Hot Topics on Disaster Information and Media Technologies (Web, Broadcasting, ...)
    • Discussion:
      • Potential topics are:
        • What were the unexpected use cases?
        • How the Web and broadcasting worked well together and how they can work more synergistically in the future.
        • What kind of existing and new web standards will help?
        • Can Semantic Web / Linked Open Data help?

People who have expressed interest: Bernadette Hyland

Authentication and Identity on the Web Using Unphishable Credentials

Proposer: Harry Halpin

Topics:

    • Discuss how Crypto API could be used http://www.w3.org/TR/WebCryptoAPI/
    • Discuss related work in other bodies such as OpenID Foundation, Mozilla Persona, IETF future HTTPAuth WG, JOSE WG, NSTIC, and other W3C WGs such as WebRTC WG and WebID CG.
    • Discuss what work the W3C should do in this space and time-scales.
    • Demo and discussion of a hybrid "bridge" API for web cryptography that handles crypto operations outside of content JS in privileged scope
    • Do it after lunch, not conflicting with hands-on WebID session.

People who have expressed interest: Tobie Langel, David Dahl

Identity and Privacy

Proposer: Henry Story

Topics:

  1. Presentation:
  2. Hands on using tools the community has built
    • Make a WebID profile and certificate for each person present
    • build a group of all members present and publish using ldp
    • give access to resources to members of the group to some resources, members and their friends to others, etc... ( by editing access control rules using ldp)
    • build/demo an html+javascript client purely based on linked data using the above
  3. Discussion
  4. Issues of Privacy
    • how can this be used at the W3C? Some ideas:
      • improve over current access control at W3C
      • increase flexibility for W3C Members to create policies of access
      • services for authenticated robots - such as access to paying validation services, linked data robots, ...
    • discussion of WG that may need to be created
    • Compare and contrast with work done in other groups such as OpenID Foundation, Mozilla Personae, IETF future HTTPAuth WG, JOSE WG, NSTIC, and other W3C WGs such as WebRTC.

People who have expressed interest: Alexandre Bertails (W3C), David Wood, Antoine Zimmermann, Melvin Carvalho, Sebastian Trueg (OpenLink SW), Pierre Maret

Test the Web Forward Recap & Future Planning

Proposers and leaders: Rebecca Hauck and Alan Stearns

AGENDA: Slides

  • Recap of 2012 events - 5 minutes
  • Planned Next Steps - 5 minutes
  • Moderated Group Discussion
    • Planned Discussion Points - 30 minutes:
      • How can we increase attendance at events?
      • Ideas for TestTWF Meetup topics?
      • Should TestTWF become part of the community efforts under Webplatform.org?
      • Should we associate bit TestTWF events with W3C events or separate them?
    • Other Discussion Points - 10 minutes

People who have expressed interest: Tobie Langel, Odin Hørthe Omdal, Marcos Caceres, Art Barstow

Linked Data: Helping Public Sector to Publish High Quality Data

Proposer and facilitator: Bernadette Hyland (Gov LD WG, 3 Round Stones)

  • Please join us in a discussion of what can be done to better articulate the value proposition of Linked Data in a way that makes sense to public and private sector managers with budgets.
  • What's working well with efforts to make the Web of Data indispensable?
  • What can be improved?
  • Discuss approaches to resolve the "Four Challenges of Open Data" as described by Jeni Tennison, see http://www.theodi.org/blog/four-challenges-open-data
  • How can the W3C lend support in a way that also complements the W3C's goals?
  • Plan to share (briefly) how you're publishing and/or consuming Linked Data, inside or outside the firewall.

People who have expressed interest: David Wood, Ivan Herman, Yosuke Funahashi

Linked Data for Web developers: JSON for Linking Data

Proposer and facilitator: Francois Daoust (Joshfire)

Web app developers need to integrate and manipulate content from various sources, either from their own databases and/or from external content provider APIs. To ease development and maintenance, content manipulation needs to remain clear and easy to grasp, which usually ends up being synonymous to "I'll use a specific data model that suits my particular needs for this app". Historically, developers have looked at the Semantic Web with reluctance, as if that was sure to make things more complex than they already were. JSON-LD, proposed by the JSON-LD Community Group and now discussed within the RDF WG, brings linked data to the developer usually without requiring developers to change the way they think and implement things.

Goals of the open discussion:

  • Explain what JSON-LD is from a developer point of view
  • Review the progress made by the group on JSON-LD, syntax and API
  • Discuss integration with typical Web developers toolsets.
  • Discuss features, tools, and libraries that might be useful or needed

People who have expressed interest: Bernadette Hyland, Tobie Langel, Marcos Caceres

Web Intents and Web Intents for local services

Proposer: Claes Nilsson (Sony Mobile) / Naoyuki Sato (Sony)

Topics:

  • General Web Intents presentation and a demo by Greg Billock (Google)
  • Presentation of Web Intents Addendum for local service specification by Claes Nilsson (Sony Mobile)
  • Web Intents Addendum demo by Kensaku Komatsu (NTT communications) / Naoyuki Sato (Sony)
  • Questions and discussion

End-to-end W3C APIs

Proposer: Alexandre Morgaut (4D)

Tag: #jseverywhere

HTML5 and offline support contributed in the creation of a bunch of APIs which only made sense on server-side in first place: File/FileSystem, Workers, Sockets, Storage/Session, Blob, ImageData. Most of those APIs, and even the already existing XMLHttpRequest have been designed from the beginning to be usable via either synchronous or asynchronous APIs from the very early stages (synchronous is not blocking any more the user interface in browsers when used in workers).

Now that the Server-Side JavaScript is rising again either in synchronous and asynchronous implementations, it is time, if we really want interoperable code/libraries/modules, to try to make those APIs also implementable in the server-side context, and then on the other end, to propose Server-Side JavaScript implementations to support them. CommonJS started a great project, it is now time to make its ambitions real.

Agenda:

  1. Presentation:
    • Feedback on previous work at CommonJS and from some SSJS implementations
    • Feedback on our experiences in the Wakanda implementation
  2. Potential Topics:
    • Web Worker context compared to SSJS context
    • Mixte Synchronous / Asynchronous APIs
    • Making Existing Client-side JS APIs recommendations adaptable to the server context
    • Defining W3C recommendation for Server-side JavaScript APIs?
    • Remote debugging for Remote (Server) Workers
    • Potential common package/module format support (CommonJS, AMD, ECMAScript 6)
    • DOM Events, ProgressEvent, EventSource, Server Events (EventEmitter?), & Client Events
    • start the activity of the community group

Slides: http://www.slideshare.net/alexandre_morgaut/endtoend-w3c-apis-tpac-2012

People who have expressed interest:

Community & Business Groups

Proposer: Ian Jacobs

Topics:

    • Policy questions
      • Chair selection (brainstorm)
      • If interest, Ian can review other policy topics
    • Specification transition topics

People who have expressed interest: Bernadette Hyland, Tobie Langel, Marcos Caceres, Kaz Ashimura, J. Alan Bird

Distributing Data now at dir.w3.org

Proposer: David Wood

The W3C Community Directory at http://dir.w3.org is currently a central repository for community information. The service is built using Linked Data, but requires user accounts to be created and managed in order to provide or update information. A new (Open Source) software release allows for the distribution of directory information via RDFa in HTML pages on Member sites such that the community directory may be automatically updated without the need for user accounts. Anyone could (theoretically) provide a URL to a Web page to the site operators; the site could then automatically spider, collate and display the community directory information. This approach would allow for both a showcase of key W3C technologies and remove the current impediments to use associated with user accounts.

Topics:

    • Eating our own dog food: Embedding RDFa with directory information
    • Encouraging Members and Invited Experts to provide directory information via RDFa
    • Modifying dir.w3.org to collect, collate and display distributed directory information using the current platform

People who have expressed interest: Bernadette Hyland, Ivan Herman

WebPlatform.org

People who have expressed interest: Tobie Langel, Yosuke Funahashi

Making the multilingual web work

    • We will discuss at least three topics:
    • The aim of the session is twofold
      • Get feedback on the directions in above three areas / work items
      • Get feedback on what is missing for making the multilingual Web work in general
      • Understand what areas we should relate internationalization work to more closely: HTML, Semantic Web, ...?
      • Reflect about the synergy between w3c activities and eu funding, what works, what doesn't, what are the prerequisite of success etc, based on our experiences in multilingual web etc.

Building in and on the Social Web: Best and Worst Practices

    • Instead of just talking about how we can plug "Social" into existing applications or build upon current Social platforms, let's *get* social. Bring your powerpoint (or slidy) karaoke, lightning talks, mad libs (fill in the blanks with "social") to kick-start a serious conversation about where standards can help the Social Web.
    • Proposed by Wendy Seltzer

People who have expressed interest: Tantek Çelik

Digital marketing and the Web

    • Considering a series of Workshops in 2013 starting with the interoperability of digital marketing across OWP-supported devices. Karen Myers to organize.
    • Karen notes we will want to avoid scheduling simultaneously Digital Publishing and Digital Marketing.

Digital Publishing and the Web

Organizer: Ivan Herman

The publishing industry at large is undergoing a major change as a result of the Internet and the Web. These shifts include changes on what is being published, how the published material is presented to the consumer, what support and what format the published information is produced on, what the new business models are, what is the role of search engines, libraries, electronic catalogs, electronic archives in a new, modern era of publishing, etc.

Answers to these challenges are are not yet settled by the industry and are subject of ongoing discussions. One general fact is, however, that the publishing industry has become one of the major users of the W3C standards, i.e., of the Open Web Platform, of a Web of Data, etc. But publishing is not only a consumer of W3C standards: it is also primary player on the Web and hence a major source of feedback on the technologies in terms of requirements.

W3C is considering playing a more active role in this area, in cooperation with all the other stakeholders, organizations, and of course commercial entities in this area.

    • Considering a series of workshops: ebooks, publishing workflow for now; possibly journal/magazine publishing, scientific publishing, and metadata at some later stage.
    • Ivan Herman to organize. See if Markus Gyilling available.

People who have expressed interest: Bert Bos

Performance

The scope of the web performance working group is mostly to help developers by giving them more information about performance bottlenecks. Proposal for this breakout session is to address another aspect of performance:

    • In advance of Web Performance Workshop, organized by Tobie Langel and (we hope) Paul Bakaus.
    • What tech is technically ready for consumption but simply not fast enough? (I.e. Audio on some platforms)
    • Where are browser developers cheating, saying they implement "x" and "y" but nobody can actually use it due to performance issues or missing adjacent APIs (and how can we prevent this? (Audio, Gyroscope)
    • What are the real-world combinations of specs developers want to explore but can't due to performance constrains?

People who have expressed interest: Koichi Takagi, Hidetoshi Yokota

Is user agent Fingerprinting a lost cause?

Proposer: Brad Hill

As more features and functionality are added to the Web browser, the more risks we create in terms of privacy and security. As user agent complexity increases, and as they expose more "native" variation in the underlying platform, so does their ability to be uniquely identified (and users tracked) through capability analysis.

The EFF's Panopticlick project already tracks ~60 bits of identifying information available in the typical user agent and certainly a more determined effort could find more, in addition to information available through lower-layer technologies like TCP or side-channels like JavaScript performance profiling.

What responsibility do W3C WG's have to make their technologies passive-privacy friendly, and how is that to be balanced with discoverability and usability?

Topics:

    • Is preventing fingerprinting a lost cause in the general purpose web user agent?
    • Where is the bar on trackability? Life-critical anonymity for political dissidents is different in what we can and must promise vs. "casual" anonymity for e.g. advertising
    • Lessons from Do Not Track on technical vs. policy-driven approaches
    • Lessons from anonymous / incognito browser modes
    • Should specs provide standard defaults for anonymous / incognito / Tor browser modes?

People who have expressed interest: Dominique Hazael-Massieux, Wendy Seltzer, Stefan Hakansson, Nick Doty, Adam Bergkvist, Tobie Langel, Paul Bakaus

Do Not Track: Where are we now? Where are we going?

Proposer: Nick Doty

Participants in the Tracking Protection Working Group will give a quick update on the current status of DNT standardization work. We will facilitate a general discussion of where we should go next with this type of work.

Topics:

People who have expressed interest: Nick Doty, Thomas Roessler, David Singer, Aleecia McDonald, Yosuke Funahashi

Declarative 3D as Polyfill

Proposer: Kristian Sons (DFKI) and Johannes Behr (Fraunhofer)

The aim of the Community Group 'Declarative 3D for the Web' is to develop an extension to HTML to allow the declarative description of interactive 3D scenes. We aim a high level of integration with HTML/DOM/CSS, a low entry barrier to 3D graphics for Web developers, and thus a broader availability of 3D graphics. We have two very successful systems, XML3D and X3DOM. These systems emulate our ideas on basis of generic DOM elements, WebGL (or Stage3D) and JavaScript. There are dozens of internal and external industry as well as research projects that are based on the current status of the projects. BTW, don't be confused with the names, the intention is to 'extend' HTML.

Recently (at SIGGRAPH) we had very fruitful discussion with browser vendors (namely Firefox and Chrome). They regard our project very positive. They made very clear, that they will (currently) not integrate a declarative approach natively into their frameworks, but that they will support us to improve our Polyfill implementations e.g. via API extensions. This lead to a refocus in the CG.

We have very strong backup by medium and large industry partners (e.g. BMW, Intel, SAP) for our ideas. They prefer a declarative format with durability to a certain degree. That's why we aim a common specification that could have multiple implementations, maybe even a native one day. We see a declarative approach as important bridge between WebGL/TypedArrays/Khronos and HTML/CSS/W3C. We have very concrete ideas, good connections to the WebGL teams of several vendors (Chrome, Mozilla, Apple) as well as to Khronos, and many concepts in W3C that could already be used (e.g. CSS 3D Transforms, Filter Effects).

The declarative graphics approach is key to leveraging the Web application development infrastructure that is increasingly widespread. By putting most graphic elements directly in the DOM we gain access to the huge Web development infrastructure and can produce graphic applications that appear as normal as any web based application. We also have made good progress integrating massive amounts of graphics data, e.g. large scale CAD meshes, with declarative graphics. Graphics appropriate for the DOM goes there and graphics not appropriate for the DOM is accessible but not slowed by unnecessary DOM access.

Further support for Declarative 3D is also under consideration in the standards arena. The Extensible 3D (X3D) Graphics standard is already well aligned with HTML5 and the W3C Recommendations, and has found strong design principles in common with Declarative 3D by participating in this effort. The Web3D Consortium has completed X3D version 3.3, and is now working to evolve future X3D versions 3.4 and 4.0 in concert with Declarative3D.

To develop this specification, we would like to discuss/learn, what level of integration is realistic and timely. We think that many of these ideas could also be interesting for other Polyfills, which seem increasingly important for standardization.

Topics:

    • Declarative 3D CG: Current State
    • Discussions we had with Browser vendors
    • 3D Graphics - Level of HTML Integration
      • Based on current APIs
      • Based on future/possible APIs (CSS extensions and monitoring, debugger API etc)
    • General support for Polyfill implementations

People who have expressed interest:

Making the Process More Agile, in Practice and Form

  • Steve Zilles to organize (one or more sessions).

People who have expressed interest: Tantek Çelik

Extended DRM requirements for content distribution

Proposers: Kiyoshi Tanaka, Toru Kobayashi

In the world, many commercial IPTV services and mobile content distribution services by telecom carriers have already launched. For the next step to evolve services, there is a discussion for the migration to HTML5 browser-based service from the current service system.

To achieve this effort in near future, there are many requirements of DRM issue. From the viewpoint of the service continuity, the new service system is needed to accept compatibility with the current service model. In addition, there is also a requirement for the new services for distribution to multi-screen or multi-device.

The proposed session includes introducing the current service examples and discussing requirements for DRM with the business situation.

"Requesting for a time slot of 13:30-14:20 or 14:30-15:20 as a pre-select session"

Topics:

    • Motivation
    • DRM issues
      • Content protection
      • Copyright protection
    • Related activities in W3C
      • Encrypted Media Extensions (EME)
    • Extended issues
    • Use cases
      • Dongle as a service portal
      • Multi-screen
      • Multi-content package service
    • Technical issues
      • Dongle as a service portal
      • Multi-screen
      • Multi-content package service

People who have expressed interest:

XML Memory and Change Tracking

Proposers: Steven Pemberton (CWI), Robin La Fontaine (DeltaXML)

Leader/chair: Steven Pemberton

Summary

XML data is constantly changing - we are proposing a standard way to record the changes and encapsulate these in the XML document itself, providing a 'memory' of previous states or change tracking.

Description

A number of different XML schemas are developing extensions to record/track changes. One example of this is DITA which needs a better way to track changes, i.e. the classic 'change tracking' while editing a document. Another example is StratML (Strategy Markup Language) where a record of updates to a plan would form a useful record. Rather than develop many different solutions to this, a single XML standard would be beneficial to all.

Some XML editing/authoring applications have their own change tracking format, but these all differ from one another and are limited in their capabilities. A single standard would be enable application vendors to handle change tracking in different schemas more consistently, and users could view/edit change-tracked documents in different XML applications.

XML memory might also enable browsers to show changes to web pages where appropriate, or enable viewers to roll-back to see a previous version, or to view variants of information.

Topics:

  • Introduction [1]
  • Overview of the proposal
  • Discussion of use cases, requirements, interest

People who have expressed interest:

Smarter Webapps for Smarter Phones

Proposers: Bryan Sullivan (AT&T), Philipp Hoschka (W3C)

Leader/chair: Bryan Sullivan

Summary

This breakout will be a followup to the Network Friendly Webapps CG work, and will focus on extending the GSMA's “Smarter Apps for Smarter Phones” recommendations to Webapps and the Web browser context in particular, and determine what specific specs or best practices should be developed by W3C in response.

Description

GSMA’s “Smarter Apps for Smarter Phones” primarily focused on native app development and platform APIs. But many of the same objectives and general techniques also can apply (or will someday be applicable) to the Web. This breakout will consider how some of those objectives may be achievable using Web standards, with focus on

    • what you can do, today
    • what more do you need, either as known gaps of the Web in supporting the smarter app objectives, or other things we haven’t considered yet

Topics

See /SmarterWebapps for a detailed agenda, and to add other topics to the agenda. Here is a summary of the topics:

    • Existing capabilities focused on the User Experience (UX)
    • Existing capabilities focused on efficient network usage
    • What from the smarter apps recommendations seems to be missing from the Web platform
    • What we haven't considered at all
    • What should W3C do
      • In existing groups e.g. Web Performance
      • In areas not covered by existing groups
      • As specification work
      • As best practices and developer-supporting assets (e.g. code examples, JavaScript libraries)
      • Organizing a continuing dialog to determine the above

Relationships to other sessions

    • #Performance : These two sessions may be different in the industry and community. On the other hand, in the domain of network friendly apps, these may collaborate. Therefore, it may be preferable to be lined up them sequentially.

People who have expressed interest: Mohammed Dadas, Hidetoshi Yokota,　Koichi Takagi, Natasha Rooney, Sakari Poussa

Understanding WebDriver

Proposers: Simon Stewart (Selenium project), David Burns (Mozilla)

Leader/chair: Wilhelm Joys Andersen

Interested: Art Barstow

Despite only having reached FPWD, there are already multiple implementations of the WebDriver spec. This session will demonstrate the existing implementations, providing some concrete examples of the user-facing API. We shall also discuss the various audiences who might be interested in this spec, ranging from W3C spec authors seeking to write conformance tests that work across multiple browsers, to testers trying to demonstrate that modern web apps work as expected. Topics would include:

    • What is WebDriver?
    • What are the intended audiences for WebDriver?
    • What does the user-facing API look like?
    • Demonstration, showing Opera's, Google's and Chrome's implementations.
    • Discussion raised by these points!


Web Quality and UX Best Practices

Proposers: Aurélien Levy & Elie Sloim (Temesis)

Leader/chair: Elie Sloim

w3c develop standards on various web technologies but until now there is no wide and open reflexion inside the consortium on how people must use these standards to deliver a good experience for their customers/users. Temesis leads the Opquast (Open quality standards) project since several years and already produce various best practices (SEO, Performance, OpenData, Accessibility) with help of various contributors under a Creative Commons BY-SA License . This session will be the occasion to discuss altogether if there is an opportunity to work on those subjects inside a w3c environment

    • What is Opquast?
    • What is the objectives of the project ?
    • What is the methodology to create UX best practices ?
    • What we already have as best practices ?
    • How can we move forward in a w3c process ?
    • Discussion raised by these points!

Sessions You Volunteer to Do: "Chair Track"

We've invented this idea of a "Chair track". Not set in stone.

How to chair

I (chaals) volunteer to run a single session on effective ways to manage a meeting. This is an action item from the AB, anyway. Agenda:

    1. get volunteer co-chair
    2. brainstorm techniques
    3. review/select techniques
    4. review chairing process

Interested: Henry Story, Bernadette Hyland, Sakari Poussa

Modern Guide

Proposer: Ian Jacobs

  • We will review the progress of the task force that is revising the Chair Guidebook, and get your feedback on organization of updated documentation.

People who have expressed interest: Olivier Thereaux, Bernadette Hyland

Testing at W3C

  • Tobie Langel, Philippe Le Hégaret, James Graham

People who have expressed interest: Matt Womer, Kaz Ashimura, Giuseppe Pascale, Mark Vickers, Yosuke Funahashi, Odin Hørthe Omdal, Marcos Caceres, Art Barstow, Sakari Poussa, Rebecca Hauck

Moving W3C repositories to git

Proposer: Rebecca Hauck / James Graham

  • Discussion of the advantages / disadvantages of using git+github for W3C-related work
  • Working through the technical and social issues such a change would cause

People who have expressed interest: Tobie Langel, Odin Hørthe Omdal, Tantek Çelik

People who think git is overkill for W3C needs: David Wood

People who think that people who think this is about git and not about GitHub are missing the point: Tobie Langel

People who ROFL re what Tobie said: me

Sessions You Volunteer to Do: "Editor Track"

We've invented this idea of a "Editor track". Not set in stone.

New TR styles

Proposer: Vincent Hardy

Topics:

People who have expressed interest: Lea Verou, Divya Manian, Robin Berjon, Fantasai, Tantek Çelik, Tobie Langel, Olivier Thereaux

Breakout session on ReSpec

Proposer and fearless leader: Robin Berjon

A lot of specs are now using ReSpec — I would find it helpful to put people in a room and chat.

Topics would include:

    • User feedback
    • Feature requests
    • What's next
    • Transition to v3
    • Non-W3C documents (IETF has been mentioned many times, Opera uses it for internal documentation, etc.)
    • Better UI
    • Linting, obviating pubrules, validation, link checking
    • How to contribute
    • The shared bibref service
    • Anything else people are interested in

My first thought would be a breakout session of the same kind we had last year, but I'm open to other formats as well.

People who have expressed interest: Tobie Langel, Olivier Thereaux, Bernadette Hyland, Ivan Herman, Tantek Çelik

The Future of /TR and W3C Publication Process

Proposer: Philippe Le Hegaret / Ted Guild

  • What is /TR
  • Different visions for what /TR should be?
  • Impact on W3C Publication Process

People who have expressed interest: Tantek Çelik

Sessions You Want Someone Else to Organize

Please provide:

    • session topic (as a === subhead === )
    • your name
    • one sentence session summary
    • 1+ paragraph session description
    • If you support this session idea and are not the original proponent, please put your name and any supporting rationale. (Or, if you think this is not a good idea, please explain why.)

Web of Devices

Proposer: Magnus Olsson (Ericsson)

It shouldn't surprise anyone that the number of devices (with a web user-agent) by far surpasses the number of "organic" users (me, you, us) i.e. a person that uses a browser to digest a HTML/JS/CSS page.

Traditional W3C working groups mainly interpret The OWP as being a monolithic browser implementation/experience with almost no consideration for a web of devices (unless device equals a browser). Web of Devices is worked on outside of W3C (W3C left behind in area of Internet of Things for the same reason).

Practical areas to consider:

    • APIs not welded into browsers (look what WebinOS is doing)
    • Enable local discovery of user-agent resources (Wearable or nearby sensors)
    • A non-document centric Object Model (Connected Object Model)
    • How to reuse the full OWP stack when user-agent is "head-less"

Ideally representative from W3C TAG to moderate and/or provide guidance on architecture issues. May overlap with sessions in the area of OWP Completeness, Web and Automotive, Local Discovery/Intents.

Web and Automotive

Intro Day

    • I would like to see an Intro Day at TPAC, How to be a WG Participant (Liam)
      • Ian Jacobs: We are having a new rep breakfast on Tuesday

E-learning standards

    • Lack of e-learning standards? (Marie-Claire)
    • Topics of work would cover data exchange formats, emphasis on WAI and Internationalisation/multilingualism, use of HTML5. Evaluation of mobile learning too.

OWP Completeness

    • What do we need to do to make the OWP more complete?

More Chair Track suggestions

    • Profiles and modularity (HTML WG? CSS WG?) Paul Cotton? Tantek Celik?
    • Web for All: Horizontal aspects of our work (Panel with Shawn Henry, Shadi Abou-Zahra, Richard Ishida, Security rep? Privacy rep?)

W3C staff notes on some suggestions

Just notes. Actual session proposals (that you want to do, or want someone to do) go above.

Chair face-to-face

  • Part of a day. Suggested by TLR and with strong support of Membership (see May 2012 chairs thread).
  • Some topics
    • How do we find more quality editors?
    • How much Process do we need to apply?
    • How can we get things moving faster?
    • What's the best place to have "Make It So, Team Contact" t-shirts printed?
    • How do we make our work and documents more nimble?
    • What parts of the Patent Policy are often ignored but particularly useful?
    • Which of the gavel or bullwhip is most effective?
    • Share your practical tricks (logistic, edito, document, great minutes ...) ?
    • How to integrate the W3C transversal topics in deliverables(privacy, accessibility, ...) ?
    • What about a standard WG dashboard for reporting our activities ?

Making Web Platform as good as Native

  • Talk to PH, TBL

People who have expressed interest: Tobie Langel, Daniel Glazman (not willing to be on a panel though), ArtB (Observer), Tantek Çelik

Retrieved from "https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=TPAC/2012/SessionIdeas&oldid=84542"