The draft minutes from the March 4 Widgets voice conference are
available at the following and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-wam-minutes.html
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webapps mail list before March 18 (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
04 Mar 2010
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010JanMar/0741.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-wam-irc
Attendees
Present
Art, Bryan, Marcos, Robin, Arve, StevenP
Regrets
Marcin
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Review and tweak agenda
2. [6]Announcements?
3. [7]P&C spec: <span> element and dir attribute
4. [8]WARP spec
5. [9]URI scheme spec
6. [10]View Modes Media Feature spec
7. [11]AOB
* [12]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<darobin> joining in a split second!
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
Date: 4 March 2010
Review and tweak agenda
AB: the draft agenda was posted on March 3 (
[13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JanMar/07
41.html ). Will add View Modes Media Features to the agenda since
Robin posted an update today (
[14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JanMar/07
45.html ). Any other change requests?
[13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010JanMar/0741.html
[14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010JanMar/0745.html
Announcements?
AB: I have one: No call next week on March 11; next call will be
March 18. Any other short announcements?
P&C spec: <span> element and dir attribute
AB: earlier this week Marcos submitted a proposal on how to address
the <span> element and dir attribute (
[15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JanMar/07
15.html ).
[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010JanMar/0715.html
MC: I'm waiting to see what the I18N WG says
... I added <span> and dir attr to the spec
... but I have not spec'ed he behavior
... we want to defer the proc model to a sepearate spec
AB: is that proving to be problematic?
MC: it's a bit complicated
... the bidi stuff that is
... if dir attr is set globally, need to set limits
... some stuff such as IRI interaction isn't clear
... for example <name> has a short name
... could have name in English and short name in Hebrew
AB: are you having a diaglog with I18N group?
MC: they were supposed to discuss it yesterday
... haven't seen their minutes yet
... Scott and Addison have been discussing it
... not clear how attrs are affected by direction
AB: what's the prior art?
MC: HTML5
... but I think it is underspecified
AB: other formats?
MC: SVG is likely
... so we could check it
AB: I would expect a lot of languages
RB: SMIL, XForms, etc.
<darobin> ... DocBook, TEI
AB: can we minimize the changes to P&C and defer all processing to
the separate spec?
MC: yes, that's the intent but not clear if we can get that
... when an impl gets back a dir string, it's got additional
semantics in it
SP: can't we just use CSS for this?
... CSS has a rule that matches bidi algorithm
MC: there is no style associated with config.xml
... that is also discouraged in some places e.g. HTML5
... the behavior we are looking for is indeed defined in CSS
SP: can't we just say the text included behaves the same rules as
CSS
MC: yes, that is part of the solution
... but there are additional issues too
AB: let's pause to see if the I18N WG has posted their minutes from
yesterday's discussion
MC: yes, sure
AB: I just checked their archive and see no postings on March 3 or 4
<Steven> [16]http://www.w3.org/2010/03/03-pf-minutes.html
[16] http://www.w3.org/2010/03/03-pf-minutes.html
<Steven> is that it?
AB: OK, so what is the plan of action
MC: need to continue the investigation
... in my last email to them I asked them questions
... we need to get their answers
<scribe> ACTION: barstow followup with Richard and Addison re the
<span> and dir attribute discussions [recorded in
[17]http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-wam-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-506 - Followup with Richard and Addison re
the <span> and dir attribute discussions [on Arthur Barstow - due
2010-03-11].
AB: the draft agenda includes a discussion on the Widget BiDi spec
... I presume there is no need to discuss that now
MC: yes, that's correct; we need to get feedback from I18N WG
... this is a new and complex area
AB: ok; understood; KUTGW
WARP spec
AB: the WARP PAG is still in progress and we may continue to work on
the spec ( [18]http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-access/ ). Two
questions here: what is the status of LC comment responses (
[19]http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/WD-widgets-a
ccess-20091208/ ) and what is the status of the test suite?
[18] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-access/
[19] http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/WD-
widgets-access-20091208/
RB: I think there is only 1 LC comment
... and it was from Dom and is straight forward
... I'll follow-up today
AB: my recollection is there are two but I'll need to do some
searching
RB: I'll check too
AB: Marcos, you will object to WARP going to CR without a test
suite?
MC: yes that is correct
AB: a question is, who is willing to work on the test suite?
SP: what's the problem with entering CR without a test suite?
MC: we have had problems with other specs because there was no TS
... it caused us to have to create multiple CRs
SP: OK
AB: so, is anyone willing to contribute to the WARP TS?
MC: we need another server to test against
... need that for cross-domain access
<darobin> [we can test with www and dev]
MC: think we can use dev.w3.org and then my server or RB's server
AB: so finding the servers doesn't seem like a big factor
MC: could potentially do everything on one server if diff ports are
used
RB: could use www.w3.org and dev.w3.org
... so think we'll be fine
MC: ok; let's do it that way
... if RB could follow the pattern I used, that would be great
RB: I can help if you
MC: but I can help set up the infra
... but that's not the test cases
RB: understood
... if you set up the infra, I'll create the tests
AB: did I capture your agreements properly?
RB: yes
MC: yes
... are we talking about 20 tests or so?
... but could be more like 100
RB: seriously doubt it will reach that high
AB: thanks MC and RB
URI scheme spec
AB: Robin, did you respond to Julian Reschke's 25-Feb comment (
[20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JanMar/07
13.html )?
[20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010JanMar/0713.html
RB: not yet
... I will respond to the three comments
View Modes Media Feature spec
AB: earlier today Robin announced a new ED of the VMMF spec (
[21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JanMar/07
45.html ).
[21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010JanMar/0745.html
<darobin> [22]http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-vmmf/Overview.html
[22] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-vmmf/Overview.html
RB: it's really simple
... defines one media feature
... since it is a UI-related spec, we can't be overly constraining
... the spec says UA should make a "best-effort" attempt
AB: any comments?
... I like the simplicity
... as well as providing the freedom for the UA to
do-the-right-thing
... what about a heads-up to CSS WG and if so, what list do we use?
RB: yes, we should; I suggest www-style
AB: what do people think about starting a 2-week pre-LCWD comment
review period?
<darobin> +1
RB: think that's a good idea
MC: agree
Arve: yes
AB: any objections?
<Steven> I'm OK with that
AB: OK, I'll start that review
... and then I'll forward that announcement to www-style
... OK?
RB: Yes, Mr Barstow
<scribe> ACTION: barstow start a 2-week pre-LCWD review period for
the VMMF spec [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-wam-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-507 - Start a 2-week pre-LCWD review
period for the VMMF spec [on Arthur Barstow - due 2010-03-11].
AB: who is willing to contribute to the test suite?
... could be a pretty thin test suite
RB: there is only 1 normative assertion and it is a SHOULD
MC: could be about 10 test case
... there are 5 states plus error conditions
... there is also the fallback behavior
AB: anything else on this for today?
[ No ]
AOB
AB: Next and last call in March is March 18 (no calls on March 11 or
25)
... Heads-up: time for March 18 will be the same in US but 1 hour
earlier in Europe (14:00 Paris)
... would that be problematic?
RB: should be ok
SP: US changes on Marc 13?
AB: yes
RB: I must send regrets for the 18th
AB: any other business for today?
... Meeting Adjourned
<Steven> bye
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: barstow followup with Richard and Addison re the
<span> and dir attribute discussions [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-wam-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: barstow start a 2-week pre-LCWD review period for the
VMMF spec [recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-wam-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]
