From W3C Wiki
< TPAC‎ | 2014
(Redirected from TPAC2014/SessionIdeas)

We encourage attendees to start brainstorming TPAC2014 Wednesday session ideas in advance of the meeting.

See the TPAC 2014 FAQ for more information.

How to use this page

Please use this page to:

  • Propose sessions you wish you lead
  • Propose sessions you wish others to lead
  • Indicate whether you plan to attend a session (helps with scheduling)
  • Please place new proposal at the bottom of this document

How to propose a session

Please provide:

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

And feel free to simply add them at the bottom.

Telcos @ W3C

  • Proposer: Dominique Hazael-Massieux
  • Summary: A significant number of W3C Members have their core business in the telecommunication space (mobile operators, network equipment providers); this session aims at discussing how W3C can better serve the needs and aspirations from that industry
  • Type: open discussion
  • Background materials:
  • Interested in attending: Ryoichi Kawada, Mohammed Dadas (presentation), Claudio Venezia (presentation), Bryan Sullivan (presentation), Dan Sun, Dieter Gludovacz, Al Villarica, Natasha Rooney (presentation), Dan Appelquist (presentation), Frode Kileng, Dan Romascanu, Istvan Lajtos, Francesco Vadala', Varun Singh
  • Constraint: Don't schedule at same time as Carrier session.

Crowd sourcing use cases: spec development at light-speed!

Proposer: Natasha Rooney (Webmob co-chair)

Webmob gets its work done by focusing on individual tasks, finding the right people and working together to get documents out the door quickly. We will hold a breakout which explains the process in greater detail and answers some questions as to how to get started working in this way. We hope chairs, our group members, and other group members will attend!

  • Type of session: Talk, Q&A
  • Additional Speakers: Marcos Caceres
  • Interested in attending: Bryan Sullivan, Ryoichi Kawada

After (HTML) 5 - Web Standards Ecosystem in 2024

  • Proposer: Art Barstow; (please send feedback, questions, etc. to public-openw3c)
  • Summary: What is the Web we want in 2024 and what is the optimal Web standards ecosystem to help achieve that?
  • Session Type: Panel
  • Panelists confirmed: Marcos Cáceres (Mozilla), Robin Berjon (representing Robin), Brian Kardell (Apollo Education Group, jQuery, Extensible Web CG)
  • Goal: to discuss topics and questions such as:
    • Is Robin's After 5 vision deserving of a Nobel Prize and/or is that dude totally bonkers?
    • What do we expect to be the major Web interoperability problem(s) over the next ten years) that will need some type of open standardization effort to help solve?
    • To facilitate the evolution of the Web and Web standards development, what should be done differently now(ish)? In particular, what do are the more immediate high priorities, versus more long term activities; what new activities will be needed (f.ex. to fill Web standards gaps); what current activities don't help or are harmful to the Web's evolution?
    • What are the most important activities related to the creation and evolution of open Web standards that need to change to facilitate more interoperable and widely deployed open Web standards?
  • Background materials:
  • Interested in attending: ArtB, Marcos, Robin, Brian, EricE

Legal Restrictions, DRM and the W3C

  • Proposer: Danny O'Brien
  • Summary: What are the legal ramifications for the end user and user agent developers for embedded technical protection measures in Web browsers and standards? What might the W3C do to improve the environment for open development in this area.
  • Type: open discussion
  • Background materials:

Improving Communications to Membership Through Data

  • Proposer: Ted Guild
  • Summary: Are we reaching you with W3C Team communications
  • Session Type: Discussion
  • Panelists confirmed: Ian Jacobs
  • Interested: Denis, Antonio, Ian
  • Goal: To share ideas for
    • Making communications more efficient. For instance, last year the staff analyzed messages we send to w3c-ac-members (by type) and concluded that most messages should not be batched, and that a once weekly package of certain types of messages would not create significant gains. We welcome suggestions.
    • Dashboards. Staff have begun work on a Data Project that will support queries. What queries do Members have?
  • Background materials:
  • Contraints:
    • Don't conflict with pubs workflow or pubrules next generation sessions

Web API for Health Care Sensors

  • Proposer: Frederick Hirsch (DAP chair)
  • note: do not overlap with 'Trust and Permissions in the Open Web Platform' or 'Next Steps for the Web of Things'
  • Interested in attending: Bryan Sullivan, Claes Nilsson, Ryoichi Kawada, Cary Bran, Erik Wilde, Yosuke Funahashi, DomHM, Wonsuk Lee, Evangelos Vlachogiannis, Chris Wilson, Mats Wichmann (remote only), Dowan Kim, Jonathan Jeon
  • Summary: Determine interest in 'Web API for Health Care Sensors' topic & possible next steps (e.g. workshop/Community Group/IG) , discuss background/scope
  • Session Type: Discussion
  • Goal: To determine:
    • Degree of interest in the overall topic
    • Interest in a W3C Workshop/Community Group, level of support
    • Discuss relationship to sensors in general, specifics to vertical
    • Discuss related work, background materials, possible scope
  • Background materials:
    • none so far.

Minutes from this session are at

Web Payments - What you need to know

  • Proposer: Manu Sporny (Web Payments CG Chair)
  • Interested in attending: Francesco Vadala', Add your name here
  • Summary: A gentle introduction to Web Payments at W3C for those that are interested, but have not been able to follow the work closely. The introduction will cover the work that has happened over the past year, what's planned for the next year, and the results of the first Web Payments face-to-face at W3C TPAC. Plenty of time will be left for questions from the curious.
  • Session Type: Brief talk w/ Discussion
  • Goal:
    • Educate W3C Membership about the Web Payments Activity
  • Background materials:

What do you want from your Mobile Carrier?

Proposer: Natasha Rooney (Webmob co-chair)

Pay-from-bill API? Data-usage API? Or Geo location? Over the past few months many developers and technologists have been asking for MORE from the mobile operators. What do you want? This session will discuss some ideas for APIs, data, ideas and solutions which could improve the web and operator collaboration and allow developers to do more with mobile operator stuff. Please add your ideas below or bring them to the session!

  • Type of session: Talk, Q&A
  • Attendees: Dieter Gludovacz (T-mobile), Claudio Venezia (Telecom Italia), Jun Ma (China Mobile), Tatsuya Hayashi (Lepidum), Jingwang Oi (Huawei), Bo Chen (China Unicom), Varun Singh (Aalto University), Istvan Lajtos (GSMA), Al Villarica (Smart), Milan Patel (Huawei), Shijun Sun (Microsoft), Haakon Bratsberg (Opera Software), Frode Kileng (Telenor), Huang Zheng (ZTE), Ray Devenbug (Library of Congress), Ilya Girgorik (Google), Jonas Sicking (Mozilla), Thomas Smailus (Boeing), Satoru Takagi (KDDI), Natasha Rooney (GSMA).
  • Previous ideas:
    • Central web service which takes payments from my mobile bill, regardless of carrier.
    • API to access data usage ("how much data have I used this month?")


Items we discussed and finer details are given below:

Detecting delays in the network

  • Understanding there are delays in the network would be beneficial to developers and browsers
  • Push messaging would benefit from this also


  • Because developers/browser vendors have no data, they don’t know what to do with certain thing
  • Background sync: new api, we can make guesses with what happens, but that is bad
  • Developers / OS / Browser Vendor could developer APIs to access data on the network
  • Developers want: what is the current speed, and why
  • Latency
  • Bandwidth
    • Data Cap
    • Billing information
    • Returning data about roaming to developers

Developer guidelines

  • Need to tell developers what are the right and wrong things to do on the web
  • China Mobile do some stuff on this
  • GSMA Smart Apps Guidelines exist
  • Tools - AT&T ARO tool is open source, good analytics from this
  • Operators could create a repo for developer tools based on network models


  • More carriers actively working on specs, bringing some mobile network issues to spec development
    • e.g. beacon


  • Working on API for connectivity, statistics for user data
  • Will bring to W3C


Actions are listed below!

  • Operators don’t know what developers want, developers don’t know what operators want
    • ACTION: connect the two, develop this list
  • OMA Connection Manager API
    • ACTION: check the API and see if it satisfies the use case
  • Data Info API
    • ACTION: communicate to new operators
    • ACTION: start work in standard to investigate
  • Tools
    • ACTION: Operators could create a repo for developer tools based on network models

Next Steps for the Web of Things

Proposer: Dave Raggett, W3C, email: <>

This session will discuss plans for a W3C Interest Group for the Web of Things (see draft charter), arising out of the June Workshop in Berlin. The Internet of Things focuses on devices (tags, sensors and actuators) and the communication technologies to access these devices. There is huge potential across many application domains. However, there has been relatively little attention to services, and new work is needed to break out of today's product silos. The aim is for the Interest Group to identify use cases and requirements for web standards to enable open markets of services that build on top of the Internet of Things, in combination with the Web of Data. The Interest Group will identify whether those requirements might be satisfied in existing or new Working Groups.

  • Interested in attending: Erik Wilde, Claes Nilsson, Gregg Kellogg, Daniel Peintner, Stephan Steglich (Fraunhofer FOKUS), Louay Bassbouss (Fraunhofer FOKUS), Michael Koster, Wayne Carr, Pratik Desai, Rumen Kyusakov, Frederick Hirsch, Ryoichi Kawada, Wonsuk Lee, Dan Romascanu, Evangelos Vlachogiannis, Cary Bran, Takuki Kamiya, Michael Cooper, Yusuke Doi, Istvan Lajtos, Felix Sasaki; ArtB, Dowan Kim, Tomoyuki Shimizu, Sakari Poussa, Peter F. Patel-Schneider, Johannes Hund, Joerg Heuer, Jean-Claude Dufourd, David Martin

Credentials on the Web - A 10,000ft Overview

  • Proposer: Manu Sporny (Organizer for Credentials CG and Web Payments CG Chair)
  • Interested in attending: Add your name here
  • Summary: A high-level overview to an initiative that is gaining support around the ability to store and transmit high-stakes credentials over the Web. These credentials include things like digitally signed government ID cards, professional licenses, university class credits, and privacy-protecting proof-of-age certifications. The audience should be those that have not been able to follow the work closely. The introduction will briefly cover the work that has happened over the past year, what's planned for the next year, and how this initiative could tie into the Web Payments Activity. Plenty of time will be left for questions from the curious.
  • Session Type: Brief talk w/ discussion
  • Goal: To determine:
    • Educate W3C Membership about the Credentials Community Group work.
  • Background materials:

Trust and Permissions in the Open Web Platform

Proposer: Dave Raggett, W3C, email: <>

As we incrementally extend the Open Web Platform with richer capabilities, users are being asked if they trust applications with access to their location, the device's camera, microphone, and so forth. What are the best practices for handing trust and permission? What do we need to do to ensure working group participants have a shared understanding of the underlying principles? What further technical work is needed?

The following diagram (with thanks to Adrienne Porter Felt) depicts a decision graph for selecting the most appropriate permission mechanism:

We will discuss how each of these mechanisms apply to the Open Web Platform, and what gaps there are in current standards. As further food for thought: If users trust a site, then the browser could grant permissions without asking the user for consent for each individual permission. Users may choose to trust sites that are endorsed by well known 3rd parties. What is needed for this to work consistently across browsers?

This session will discuss next steps for work on trust and permissions in the Open Web Platform

  • A summary from the September meeting in Paris on trust and permissions, which surveyed insights drawn from experience with native and web platforms, and insights from research studies.
  • Plans for chartering a Community Group to work on best practices and identifying work items for standardization,
  • Type of session: Panel, Q&A
  • Interested in attending: Claes Nilsson, DomHM, Wayne Carr, Natasha Rooney, Frederick Hirsch, Wonsuk Lee, Chris Wilson, Tomoyuki Shimizu, Dan Appelquist, Jonathan Jeon

Minutes for Trust & Permissions

Chair: Dave Raggett (W3C) Scribe: Jean-Claude Dufourd (Institut Mines Telecom)

Dave introduces the session by presenting some slides.

During the presentation, there were a few clarification questions, about existing trust models, permission UIs, user reactions and acceptability of restrictions.

How many people interested in a CG ? Some hands up.

How many people from a browser vendor ? Few.

Q on reputation and endorsement, is it relevant to permissions ?

Q on delegation model and legal implications/liability… is that standard’s business ?

Q about trusted UI, whether we want it or not, about styling of trusted UIs, could be discussed but not ready for std.

Q about trust in the other direction, trust by server of the client’s id, e.g. not to ask the same question twice, or make sure the person on that device is the same as before.

Comments on granularity of permissions: should the user be able to select in/out for single permissions on permission dialog FJH about a Privacy and User centric controls workshop in Berlin 20-21 Nov, scope similar to this workshop.

Q about allowing e.g. to take a picture but not do just anything with it, such as share it on social networks. Discussion on “do not track” work.

Q about statistics on permission use by apps, and audit, and maybe user reaction to audit info.

Q about sending info back “home”, about the nature of data that can be sent “home” to the server of an app. Comments on the dangers of APIs. and Social WG

Proposer: Harry Halpin, W3C email: <>

The new Social Working Group is working on a social data syntax, which currently is based off on ActivityStreams [1]. The community also has ongoing work related to Actions, which seems quite close. Thus, we'd like to bring the two communities together in order to discuss both their commonalities and differences. An agenda will be made over at the public-vocabs mailing list.


AS1 verbs and object types

more 'object types'

  • Type of session: Discussion and Q&A
  • Interested in attending: R.V. Guha, Evan Prodromou, Lloyd Fassett, James Tauber, elf Pavlik (remotely), James M Snell, Arnaud J Le Hors, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
  • minutes:

Generic Sensor API

  • Proposer: Anssi Kostiainen, Mounir Lamouri

A number of sensors are already exposed to the Web Platform (e.g. Geolocation, Device Orientation) and new sensors are on their way (e.g. Ambient Light) -- however, each API looks and feels different. Is this an issue, and if yes, how to fix that?

Currently, there is no established design pattern for sensor APIs on the Web Platform. Meanwhile, outside the browser-land, the Node.js community has defined and implemented composable APIs for exposing new sensors rapidly. Can we learn from each other? In this session we discuss the known issues of the current sensor APIs on the Web Platform and review the recent concrete proposals for sensor API unification (see background materials). Example open questions: should we decouple the sensor APIs from the window object to make it feasible to implement the APIs in other contexts outside browsers (e.g. Node.js, Internet/Web of Things)?

The generic sensor API deliverable is in scope for the W3C Device APIs Working Group, but the concrete specification work has not yet started. Come join our session, and influence the direction of this potential new work item.

  • Interested in attending: Ryoichi Kawada, Rick Waldron, Domenic Denicola, Tobie Langel, Claes Nilsson, DomHM, Mounir Lamouri, Dave Raggett, Wonsuk Lee, Frederick Hirsch, Dan Romascanu, Evangelos Vlachogiannis, Chris Wilson, Ted Guild, Cary Bran, Mats Wichmann, Dowan Kim, Tomoyuki Shimizu, Sakari Poussa, Debbie Dahl, Louay Bassbouss

Given many remote participants and wider interest, we run this session as a teleconference after TPAC, call details:

Music Notation Markup

  • Proposer: Joe Berkovitz
  • Speakers: Michael Good, Joe Berkovitz

The Web Audio API is now opening the Web Platform up to many musical applications. At the same time, the proposed Web MIDI API connects the Web to an important pre-existing protocol describing real-time music performances, namely MIDI.

In our session we'll look at music notation in particular, and the potential for the Web to address this important part of our culture. We will begin with a brief tour of some illustrative applications, followed by a short presentation on an existing open-source standard markup language, MusicXML developed by Michael Good which, like MIDI, is heavily used today in the music software industry. We're also interested in bringing contributors and experts on other markup languages into the discussion, notably MEI. After that we'd like to have an open discussion of the potential for a W3C spec describing the semantics and visual organization of music notation. While the domain of notated music may not merit the effort of built-in browser implementations, next-generation notation markup designed with the Web ecosystem in mind could be good for both music application vendors and the overall community.

There may also be opportunities to connect with work being done by the Digital Publishing IG that is looking at other domain-specific markup languages such as MathML.

  • Type: open discussion with some presentation
  • Interested in attending: Doug Schepers, Michael Cooper, James Tauber

TR Publications

5 star Civic Tech / How to promote the 5 star Open Data as the Semantic Web

Tooling Agility

  • Merged with "TR Publication"

Application Foundations

  • Proposer: Jeff Jaffe
  • Summary: Introduction to the Application Foundations, a new way to think about the Open Web Platform that will make it easier for the W3C community to converge on the top priorities for developers.
  • Type: open discussion
  • Background materials:
  • Interested in attending:

W3C Process 2015 - What is new; What should be new

What is Wide Review and How do we achieve it

  • Proposer: Steve Zilles
  • Summary: The 2014 W3C Process Document requires satisfying a Wide Review requirement prior to entry into Candidate Recommendation; what was that intended to mean and how is it to be achieved.
  • Type: Open discussion
  • Goal: According to section (Wide Review) of the Process Document, the objective is to ensure that the entire set of stakeholders of the Web community, including the general public, have had adequate notice of the progress of the Working Group and thereby an opportunity to comment on the specification. The remainder of the section outlines some criteria that might be used to assess whether wide review has taken place, but it does not define any specific "safe harbor" action. The goal of this session is to discuss what makes sense in a practical way to satisfy this requirement. For example, there has been discussion of creating a review announcement mechanism which might help trigger appropriate reviews.
  • Background Materials: Section, and the Thread beginning at:
  • IRC: #widereview
  • Minutes:

startSession("WoT devices")

A PING for Web Privacy

  • Proposer/Moderators: Christine Runnegar (ISCO), Tara Whalen (Google): PING co-chairs
  • Goal: The purpose of this breakout session is to socialise the Privacy Interest Group (PING)’s work on Privacy Specifications for Web Standards and to solicit input from across the W3C community.
These are the questions we would like to address:
  • What are known privacy vulnerabilities and risks associated with Web standards?
  • What privacy design principles make sense for the Web?
  • How do we make sure privacy concerns are raised early?
  • How should privacy reviews be conducted?
  • How will conflicts between privacy and functionality be resolved?
Please contribute your experience in addressing privacy concerns in developing Web standards within your Working Group. Tell us what works and what does not work.
  • Session type: Facilitated discussion
Discussion facilitators:
  • Christine Runnegar and Tara Whalen (moderators)
  • Frederick Hirsch (re the DAP experience) - invited
  • Nick Doty (re fingerprinting) - invited
  • Wendy Seltzer and Rigo Wenning (re privacy risks and vulnerabilities; what design principles make sense for the Web) - invited
  • Frank Dawson (re SPA) - invited
  • Interested in attending: Nick Doty

CSS Extensions to support a round display

  • Proposer: Hyojin Song(LG Electronics), Dong-Young Lee(LG Electronics)
  • Summary: New devices with a round display are emerging, such as LG G Watch R, Moto 360, and LG G3 (when the cover is closed), while the web is designed assuming a rectangular display. In this session we discuss how to extend the web (esp. CSS) to facilitate authors to develop web contents for a round display.
  • Type: Brief presentation and discussion
  • Goal: To share and develop ideas for the web to support a round display, such as:
    • detecting a round display
    • content alignment in a round display
    • layout features (e.g., polar coordinate system)
    • drawing a border line along a round display edge
  • Background Materials:
  • Interested in attending: Louay Bassbouss (Fraunhofer FOKUS), Stephan Steglich (Fraunhofer FOKUS), Add your name here

Bitcoin (cryptocurrency) Payment Protocol

  • Proposer: Glen Wiley(Verisign)
  • Summary: Review the current state of the bitcoin payment protocol and discuss gaps in the current implementations of cryptocurrency payments in general and bitcoin payments in particular. We will look at the existing BIP70 draft and an early view of an Internet Draft to be submitted to the DANE working group at the IETF to deliver authenticated payment request data via DNSSEC/DANE.

Session Type: Brief Talk/Discussion.

  • Goal: Educate the W3C on the state of Bitcoin payment protocol and other efforts underway to standardize payment requests. A secondary goal is to inform the current efforts outside the W3C to ensure that the proposals make sense in light of W3C activity.

Background Materials: None needed, we will bring you up to speed in the session with a 15 minute overview.

  • Background Materials:
  • None needed as I can provide the context at the discussion, however a preread of the BIP70 standard wouldn't hurt

Latest news from the Web Platform Testing front

  • Proposer: plh
  • Summary: This session will present the progress made on the testing front since last TPAC. James Graham substantially increased the infrastructure, using new tools like wptserve and wptrunner. While many things are still missing, WebDriver is our next frontier.
  • Goal: Educate the W3C participants on the WPT project and how to contribute
  • Background materials:
  • Interested in attending: Add your name here

Robot Interaction and the Web

  • Proposer: Debbie Dahl
  • Summary: Robots are relatively autonomous, are frequently mobile, and a particular robot will often have a shape, size and set of capabilities that are different from any other robot. What standards are needed to support web-based interaction with robots?
  • Goal: understand how the complex capabilities and form factors of robots impact the current model of web-based interaction.
  • Type: open discussion
  • Background materials:
  • Interested in attending: Add your name here

Responses to Pervasive Monitoring and Secure Origins

  • Proposer: Nick Doty
  • IETF has documented that Pervasive Monitoring is an Attack. It has been suggested that limiting some Web functionality to secure origins (authenticated origins, secure transports, or other suggestions) would be an appropriate Web-level response, related to integrity and confidentiality.
  • type of session: open discussion
  • goals: secure/authenticated origins are being discussed within a number of different WGs, with different arguments for and against. Let's try to get a better handle on the issue, the threat models and maybe coordinate our responses.

An application-oriented API for DANE and DNS

  • Proposer: Allison Mankin, Melinda Shore
  • Summary: We propose an API for application developers providing simplified access to DNSSEC and DANE, for key discovery and other advanced DNS services, without requiring detailed knowledge of the DNS.
  • Session type: talk and discussion
  • Goals: to introduce the API and gauge interest in a standardization effort
  • Background material: No prep needed, but if interested, see
  • slides: File:Dane api.pptx

Exploring ideas for improving parallelism in web applications

  • Proposer: Travis Leithead
  • Summary: Today's web applications are primarily single-threaded. Web Workers introduced the ability to use concurrency in web applications, but Workers often fail to meet developers expectations due to the relative isolation of the Worker's environment from the main thread of execution. This session is to discuss and explore the idea of improved concurrency for web applications. Is improved concurrency (beyond what exists today) necessary? Why or why not? What are some of the use cases? Where should more investigation be directed?
  • Session type: talk and discussion
  • Goals: gauge interest in pursuing additional means/methods for concurrency in the web platform
  • Background material: No prep needed.
  • Breakout page: Improving Parallelism Page

The Web: Privacy AND openness

  • Proposer: Hadley Beeman and Dan Appelquist
  • Summary: We originally designed the Web to be open. Open standards, open communication, open behaviour... and we built our infrastructure that way.
Except now we have personal data on the line. Our relationships that take place through the Web. The pages we visit reveal things about our health, our interests, our affiliations.
What should we build to continue to lead the World Wide Web to its full potential? We are moving towards more encryption on the web (HTTP/2 will play a role here) but is it enough? Should our Security IG look further at our existing specs? How do we deal with pervasive bugs (such as Heartbleed in OpenSSL) that may undermine open development activities?
What should we do offline? Would it help to educate users about the decisions they're making? Is there a role for governments to help?
What is our implied promise to web users about the privacy they can expect when they browse and how can we make good on this promise?
  • Session type: talk and discussion
  • Goal: to establish a general direction for the community — which may include/inform working group deliverables and community group activities.

Location-Based Triggers - Issues & Platform Needs

  • Proposer: Daniel Buchner
  • Summary: As the ecosystem of location-based triggers (beacons, RFID, etc.) grows and becomes mainstream, we need to ensure we are prepared for developer needs, security issues, and vendor lock-in/gatekeeing attempts that arise.
  • Session Type: talk and open discussion
  • Goal: To raise awareness about the two published proposals for location-based triggering: Physical Web and Geo-Origins.

Beyond Vendor Prefixes

  • Proposer: Jacob Rossi
  • Summary: Vendor prefixes are a compatibility nightmare. Experimental feature flags provide a shield from building premature compatibility burden (and "freezing" APIs), but lack the ability to test APIs at scale and in real-world production environments. Microsoft has been doing thinking about how we build on the concept of flags to insert a step between the experimental platform and the broadly-shipping stable platform to allow API validation and feedback in production applications while limiting the exposure to compat risk.
  • Session Type: short talk and open discussion
  • Goal: To socialize an early idea about collaborating on a new process for exposing experimental APIs more broadly