The draft minutes from the October 29 Widgets voice conference are
available at the following and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2009/10/29-wam-minutes.html
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webapps mail list before 12 November 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 Conf
29 Oct 2009
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009OctDec/0399.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2009/10/29-wam-irc
Attendees
Present
Art, Frederick, Jere, David, Marcin, Bryan, Josh
Regrets
Marcos
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]how to have a meeting with IRC only
2. [6]Review and tweak agenda
3. [7]Announcements
4. [8]Planning for Nov 2-3 f2f meeting
5. [9]TWI spec: topic list for f2f meeting
6. [10]WARP spec: topic list for f2f meeting
7. [11]AOB
* [12]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
Date: 29 October 2009
<Bryan> "conference is restricted at this time:
<Bryan> code 9231 is not accepted
<Bryan> capiche?
shepazu, HELP!
how to have a meeting with IRC only
<drogersuk> can't get into the conference call at the moment..
AB: the bridge isn't working so we will use IRC only for this short
meeting
<marcin> aah, Zakim
Review and tweak agenda
AB: draft agenda was published yesterday (
[13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/03
99.html ). Since then Marcos closed 4a, and 4b. so they will be
dropped.
... additionally, Marcos regrets for today means we will postpone 4c
to next week's f2f meeting. Result is, we won't discuss P&C spec
today.
... any other change requests for the Agenda?
... re the TWI and WARP parts of the agenda - we will only discuss
the topics for next week; we will NOT do a deep dive for any of the
topics
[13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2009OctDec/0399.html
<Bryan> can we make the bridge work?
AB: anyone have any questions before the next topic?
Announcements
<drogersuk> you can use the OMTP bridge if you want?
AB: does anyone have any short announcements?
... no, we are going to just use IRC today but thanks for the offer
<Bryan> +bryan
Planning for Nov 2-3 f2f meeting
AB: I made a few changes to the agenda (
[14]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TPAC2009Widgets) earlier
today. Some specs will not be on the agenda: DigSig, URI, Updates
and VM-I.
... any comments on f2f agenda?
[14] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TPAC2009Widgets)
<drogersuk> I think we need to discuss the security guidelines
<drogersuk> e.g. for viewmodes
AB: VM-MF is on the agenda
... we can add Security Guidelines
... it will be Monday 16:30-18:00 slot
<drogersuk> sorry I'm struggling to keep up with all these acronyms
<marcin> ok
<JereK> Nice of you to leave slots for people to catch up other
overlapping WGs, thanks
AB: thanks Jere
... David, OK?
<scribe> ACTION: barstow add security guidelines to the topic list
for Monday 16:30-18:00 time slot on Nov 2 [recorded in
[15]http://www.w3.org/2009/10/29-wam-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-430 - Add security guidelines to the topic
list for Monday 16:30-18:00 time slot on Nov 2 [on Arthur Barstow -
due 2009-11-05].
<drogersuk> Thanks Art
AB: any other general comments on the agenda?
... we will discuss topic list for TWI and WARP as separate topics
today
... last call for general comments on Nov 2-3 agenda ...
... it's unfortunate in some ways there are so many overlapping
meetings but it does have the advantage we can meet f2f with other
groups
<fh> link to agenda is where?
AB: in the long run, I think the advantages outweigh
... here
[16]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TPAC2009Widgets#Monday.2C_No
vember_2
[16] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TPAC2009Widgets#Monday.
2C_November_2
<arve> did the pin change?
AB: re bridge for remote participants, Arve made his requests. Are
there any other requests?
<arve> I tried calling in on my way here, but "this conference has
been restricted"
<arve> oki, suits me perfectly :D
AB: consider this your last chance to ask for bridge requests for
Nov 2-3
... besides Arve, any other bridge requests?
[ None ]
TWI spec: topic list for f2f meeting
<fh> note, DAP should have a bridge for the joint meeting times
AB: the topic list for the TWI spec is at (
[17]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TPAC2009Widgets#The_widget_I
nterface_.28TWI.29_spec ). Any comments, additions, deletions?
... please look at the TWI topic list for next week
... any change requests for TWI?
[17] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/
TPAC2009Widgets#The_widget_Interface_.28TWI.29_spec
<arve> ArtB: none from me
AB: ready to move on to next topic which is WARP topic list for f2f
meeting ...
WARP spec: topic list for f2f meeting
AB: WARP is the only topic in the DAP + Widgets joint meeting
<arve> I don't see uPnP as being worthy of special-casing
<JereK> What about the various File APIs?
AB: WARP topic list is:
[18]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TPAC2009Widgets#Access_Reque
sts_Policy_.28WARP.29_spec
[18] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/
TPAC2009Widgets#Access_Requests_Policy_.28WARP.29_spec
<fh> any expertise on HTML5 in webapps wg for discussion in join
session?
AB: JK, there is a separate DAP + WebApps API jointt meeting
<marcin> arve: why not?
<JereK> Oh sorry, that's for Web APIs side. Please disregard my
remark about File APIs.
AB: and in that meeting there is both File API and Web Notifications
<arve> marcin: is it any more relevant than any other local traffic?
AB: let's not deep dive today on WARP topics
<arve> marcin: I won't be sitting in on that session @TPAC, but I'll
leave my comments on mailing list instead
AB: but please do feel free to send comments to public-webapps
<marcin> arve: ok, I see. UPnP is local traffic + multicast. So it
does not matter how we name. I agree then.
<drogersuk> I agree with FH - it seems that the HTML5 / widget / DAP
space is not clear
<marcin> arve: ML is enough. I perceive TPAC as socializing mainly.
<Bryan> I agree on the unclarity - I submitted a request to the
WebApps API meeting to clarify.
AB: DR, BS, FH - if something needs clarification, please elaborate
on public-webapps
... OK?
<fh> I simply want to make sure I understand HTML5 security policy
and can have more than one conversation to do so.
<drogersuk> If we can get a general agreement on direction, it would
be a good message to put out externally
<Bryan> But it seems like there is not so much interest in
addressing my questions there, or maybe there won't be agenda time,
I don't know. The API group does not seem to be much of a group,
really.
<drogersuk> I'm proposing a meeting item along with FH here
<drogersuk> to answer that specific problem
AB: DR, FH - if you want to propose a change to the Widgets agenda,
please send your change request to public-webapps
... FH, please ACK
... DR, please ACK
<drogersuk> Art, just to understand, do you agree with the point
though?
<fh> my suggestion was simply to discuss in joint DAP/WebApps
session HTML5 security model, if discussion in WebApps API session
is not enough
AB: the term "DAP/WebApps" is too vague
... DAP has two separate joint meetings with WebApps
... 1. DAP + Widgets
... 2. DAP + WebApps' API group
<drogersuk> It might be worth getting someone to do an architecture
diagram to highlight the problem of overlaps - this is exactly the
point, there is no distinct separation
<marcin> if DAP, WebApp and HTML5 are the Web, then we need to
discuss the "Web security model", probably including CORS.
<drogersuk> we can't even agree which meeting should discuss it
AB: please note that on Tues 15:30-16:30 there is a meeting of
WebApps Widgets group + WebApps APIs group
<Bryan> I think discussing the HTML5 security model is not the same
as adopting it for DAP, or necessitate that.
AB: perhaps you should propose topics for that time slot
<drogersuk> Yes that might be the place to start it - is Ian Hickson
there?
<Bryan> I am open to discussion, but HTML5 is on its own track.
API's are distinct and should be. My questions are mainly in the
HTML5-exported API's in the Webapps group scope.
AB: I don't know who will attend that time slot. I will be there and
I presume Charles will be there
<Bryan> I plan to attend any joint meetings.
AB: DR, FH - again, please send agenda topics to public-webapps. OK?
... same for everyone else
... anything else on agendas for today?
<fh> message sent
AOB
AB: no call on Nov 5; next call is Nov 12
<Bryan> I think we need a protocol for IRC-only meetings!
AB: anything else for today?
... BS: I agree this isn't ideal
... last call ...
<drogersuk> The offer is always open if you have problems, you can
use our dial-in
AB: see you next week! Meeting Adjourned
<fh> goodbye, have a nice day
<arve> goodbye
<marcin> bye everyone
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: barstow add security guidelines to the topic list for
Monday 16:30-18:00 time slot on Nov 2 [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2009/10/29-wam-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]
[25] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
