The draft minutes from the May 20 Widgets voice conference are
available at the following and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-minutes.html
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webapps mail list before May 27 (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
20 May 2010
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010AprJun/0763.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-irc
Attendees
Present
Art, Robin, StevenP, Josh, Kenneth, Marcos
Regrets
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Agenda review
2. [6]Announcements
3. [7]Packaging and Configuration spec
4. [8]Widget Interface spec
5. [9]Access Requests Policy (WARP) spec
6. [10]URI Scheme spec
7. [11]View Modes Media Features spec:
8. [12]AOB
* [13]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
Date: 20 May 2010
Agenda review
AB: draft agenda was posted on May 19 (
[14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/07
63.html ). Any change requests?
... we will add P&F WG's comment about VMMF LC
[14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010AprJun/0763.html
Announcements
AB: deadline for comments re Digital Signatures for Widgets LCWD is
June 1
Packaging and Configuration spec
AB: on April 6 I asked the I18N WG to respond to the <span> and dir
changes. On May 12 I asked them again (
[15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010May/0002.htm
l ). I haven't received any response.
... do you Steven know I18N WG's status on this?
[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010May/
0002.html
SP: no, but I'll find out
AB: let's not block on this now and move to next topic
Widget Interface spec
AB: we have one issue that is blocking moving the spec to PR
... ISSUE-116 "Need to flesh out the security considerations for the
openURL method in the Widget Interface spec" (
[16]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/116 )
... Marcos has already added some text
[16] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/116
<Steven> i18n discussed it yesterday; Addison is actioned to reply,
and will do so soon
RB: think he is awaiting some response
AB: thanks SP
... yes, there was some offlist discussion but I forwarded that
discussion to public-webapps
... here is the thread I mentioned
[17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/05
70.html
... how do we make progress on this issue?
[17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010AprJun/0570.html
RB: the changes must be satisfactory to the comments
... then we can move to PR
<scribe> ACTION: marcos to follow-up with TLR and Adam Barth re
ISSUE-116 [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-550 - Follow-up with TLR and Adam Barth re
ISSUE-116 [on Marcos Caceres - due 2010-05-27].
RB: do we need to move P&C fwd first?
AB: no, I don't think so
Access Requests Policy (WARP) spec
AB: there was a thread about Assertion ta-?? (
[19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/05
69.html ) between Scott Wilson and Marcos
[19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010AprJun/0569.html
MC: I made it clear what needs to be done
... I expect Scott to make the change
AB: ACTION-539 - what WARP should or should not say for the default
security model (
[20]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/539 )
[20] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/539
RB: I responded to the thread
... if people aren't happy with it, we can change it
MC: I don't think the model is clear enough
RB: the model is to deny everything
MC: if the WARP model applies, do not have a http origin
RB: but the target is local widget
MC: I agree that has always been the model
... but that needs to be more clear
RB: so you want to say the model does not apply to non http origins
MC: yes
ACTION-539?
<trackbot> ACTION-539 -- Robin Berjon to work with Marcos on what
WARP should or should not say for the default security model re AB:
is some additional text needed re the default policy (
[21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/04
56.html ) -- due 2010-05-13 -- OPEN
[21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010AprJun/0456.html
<trackbot> [22]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/539
[22] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/539
RB: ok, I'll take that
AB: ACTION-546 - WARP spec: move the requirements to the beginning
of the spec to be consistent with other widget specs (
[23]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/546 )
... I don't feel strongly here
[23] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/546
RB: I'll do whatever the group wants
MC: it really doesn't matter
Kenneth: but if this is just a C&P, then go for it
RB: it is a simple change
... just tell me where you want it
AB: how about using P&C as the template
RB: OK
URI Scheme spec
AB: ACTION-526 - define the widget *URI* syntax in terms of RFC 3986
( [24]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/526 )
... are there any concerns there Robin?
[24] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/526
RB: no, I'll make that change
... I don't want to copy over the ABNF
... but describing syntax in in terms of 3986 make sense
... and 3987 IRI
AB: ACTION-549 - URI scheme spec: add the requirement(s) this spec
addresses e.g. R36 "Resolve Addressing Scheme"; identifying the
requirements is mandatory for Candidate (
[25]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/549 )
... there may other reqs too
[25] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/549
<darobin> ACTION: Robin to add requirements to Widget URIs based on
what's in the requirements document [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-551 - Add requirements to Widget URIs
based on what's in the requirements document [on Robin Berjon - due
2010-05-27].
AB: Marcos, do we have other requirements related to URI scheme?
MC: no, I don't think so
AB: ok, then ACTION-549 should be straight forward
View Modes Media Features spec:
AB: the LCWD comment period ended May 18
... Review LC comments (
[27]http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/WD-view-mode
-20100420/ )
[27] http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/WD-
view-mode-20100420/
KC: I think the view modes are mutually exclusive
... but the spec is silent on that
... think should say they are mutually exclusive
RB: that's fine by me
MC: no comment
... haven't thought about it
AB: can some UA actually do something with more than one?
RB: don't think that would make sense
KC: would expect inconsistent behavior if more than one is supported
<darobin> "Each <a>view mode</a> is defined to be exclusive of the
others." ?
AB: arguments seem to be in favor of adding the clarification
... does anyone object to that clarification?
MC: I need to think about the consequences
... I don't have any objections at this point
AB: Robin, please go ahead and make that change
MC: would be helpful to see the hole change in context
<darobin> RB: done
AB: the 2nd comment is from MC and he proposes a spec title change
... The 'view-mode' media feature
... comments
... any objections?
... so: The 'view-mode' Media Feature
MC: yes
RB: yes
AB: so Robin, please make that change
RB: done
AB: ACTION-548 - VMMF spec: add the requirement(s) this spec
addresses e.g. R39 "Display Modes" (
[28]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/548 ); identifying
the requirements is mandatory for Candidate
[28] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/548
<darobin> ACTION: Robin to add requirements to VMMF [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-552 - Add requirements to VMMF [on Robin
Berjon - due 2010-05-27].
AB: ACTION-530 - what is our time expectations/constraints re CSSOM
spec? ( [30]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/530 )
... any feedback on our timing requirements for CSSOM spec?
[30] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/530
MC: I get the sense from talking to Anne that it is a couple of
years out
... it is a difficult situation
... if people really want it, they will implement regardless of the
spec status
AB: we already have some dependencies on other HTML specs
RB: implementors may be reluctant to implement it
AB: so we either live this uncertainty or do the apis ourselves
RB: a third option is to ask CSS WG to modularize those parts we
need
... worth a discussion
AB: yes, that may make sense
RB: it is a bit of a toolbox
AB: besides Marcos and Robin, are there others that would
participate in the modularization discusion?
MC: I think Kenneth has expressed interest in this area
... it would be good if Kenneth could help with the view mode api
requirements
... and the CSSOM spec
AB: can you confirm your interest in this area Kenneth?
<kenneth> yes
KC: yes, I can help
AB: comments from WAI Protocols and Formats WG (
[31]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/07
71.html ). Note this email was after the comment deadline.
[31] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010AprJun/0771.html
<kenneth> We are actually already discussing it and have some
example implementation for WebKit already
AB: it could be that "tactile" was accidentally included and this is
a typo
RB: I think Marcin copied it from somewhere else and he thought it
meant "touch" devices
... but tactile is for Braille devices
... I think we should just remove it
MC: I agree
JS: agreed
AB: any objections to removing the word "tactile"?
[ None ]
RESOLUTION: the word "tactile" will be removed from the VMMF spec
RB: I've made the change and will respond
AB: I can add it to the CT doc
RB: OK
<scribe> ACTION: barstow VMMF spec: add the 19-May-2010 comment from
Michael Cooper to the LC comment tracking doc [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-553 - VMMF spec: add the 19-May-2010
comment from Michael Cooper to the LC comment tracking doc [on
Arthur Barstow - due 2010-05-27].
AB: the next step is discussions about CR
... any comments about its readiness for CR?
RB: need response from P&F first
AB: ok, so then during our May 27, we should be ready to agree on
publishing a Candidate
AOB
AB: any thing for today?
... next call is May 27;
... Meeting Adjourned
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: barstow VMMF spec: add the 19-May-2010 comment from
Michael Cooper to the LC comment tracking doc [recorded in
[33]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: marcos to follow-up with TLR and Adam Barth re
ISSUE-116 [recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Robin to add requirements to VMMF [recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Robin to add requirements to Widget URIs based on
what's in the requirements document [recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [37]scribe.perl version 1.135
([38]CVS log)
$Date: 2010/05/20 13:54:17 $
_________________________________________________________
[37] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[38] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Scribe.perl diagnostic output
[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20
Check for newer version at [39]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/
[39] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
Found ScribeNick: ArtB
Found Scribe: Art
Present: Art Robin StevenP Josh Kenneth Marcos
Agenda: [40]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJ
un/0763.html
Found Date: 20 May 2010
Guessing minutes URL: [41]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-minutes.html
People with action items: barstow marcos robin
[40] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
2010AprJun/0763.html
[41] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-minutes.html
End of [42]scribe.perl diagnostic output]
[42] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
