The draft minutes from the August 5 Widgets voice conference are
available at the following and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2010/08/05-wam-minutes.html
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webapps mail list before August 12 (the next Widgets
voice conference); otherwise these minutes will be considered Approved.
-Art Barstow
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Widgets Voice Conference
05 Aug 2010
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2010/08/05-wam-irc
Attendees
Present
Art, Marcos, Josh
Regrets
Frederick, Kenneth, Robin
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]Review and tweak agenda
2. [5]Announcements
3. [6]Packaging and Configuration spec
4. [7]Widget Interface spec
5. [8]AOB
* [9]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
Review and tweak agenda
AB: the draft agenda was posted a few days ago: (
[10]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JulSep/03
44.html ). Any change requests?
[10]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JulSep/0344.html
MC: no
Announcements
AB: any short announcements?
[ none ]
Packaging and Configuration spec
AB: Marcos uploaded several I18N test cases to the P&C test
repository (
[11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JulSep/01
38.html ).
... how many I18N tests have been uploaded and are there any more?
[11]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JulSep/0138.html
MC: we uploaded about 170 and have a few more
... we also need to remove some redundancies
AB: I counted about 277 last week for all of P&C
MC: that sounds about right
... don't expect any more
AB: what about review of the I18N tests?
MC: Lachlan and one other guy at Opera reviewed them
... and I reviewed them too
... we still need to get review by the I18N WG
AB: agree we should ask I18N WG for comments
... but we should wait until we are "done"
MC: Hari Kumar will notify me when the tests are ready for I18N WG
comments
<scribe> ACTION: Marcos notify the I18N Core WG about the I18N test
cases and ask them for comments [recorded in
[12]http://www.w3.org/2010/08/05-wam-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-567 - Notify the I18N Core WG about the
I18N test cases and ask them for comments [on Marcos Caceres - due
2010-08-12].
AB: Marcos also uploaded several viewmode attribute parsing test
cases (
[13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JulSep/00
96.html ).
[13]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JulSep/0096.html
MC: yes, those test fill a hole we had in our test suite
AB: as a result of these new test cases, none of the P&C
implementations is even at 50% compliance (
[14]http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/imp-report/ ).
... a question is whether or not the I18N support is "optional" or
not
[14] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/imp-report/
MC: no they really aren't because the parsing algorithms are now
directly included in the spec
... whereas before when we pointed to the ITS spec the algorithms
were external
... These new test cases are important and Lachlan did a very
thorough job
AB: so the UA must adhere to the syntax and parsing constraints but
the UA doesn't really have any requirements on how to display
internationalized attributes
... is this right?
MC: yes, that's right
... how the UA displays the internationalized strings is platform
specific
AB: we now need to get at least 2 implementations that can pass all
of the test suites
... Issue-117 ( [15]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/117
) "In Widget P&C Spec, need to clarify in the spec that dir
attribute does not apply to attributes that are IRIs, Numeric,
Keywords, etc. The dir attribute only affects human readable
strings.".
... to address this issue, I believe Marcos already updated the spec
with some "editorial" fix several weeks ago. Is this correct Marcos?
[15] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/117
MC: yes, I have already uploaded the fixes
... this required creating the "displayable attribute"
... so this issue can be closed
AB: so this was editorial, right?
MC: yes, definitely - it did not affect the processing
AB: OK, would then please close this issue Marcos?
MC: yes, I just closed it.
Widget Interface spec
AB: Issue-116 ( [16]http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/116
) "Need to flesh out the security considerations for the openURL
method in the Widget Interface spec" is blocking advancement of this
spec to Proposed Recommenation.
... Marcos proposed openURL be removed. If that is done, what is
there an alternate way a developer can get similar functionality?
[16] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/116
MC: I can take an action to define some mechanism
AB: can you submit a proposal to the list?
MC: yes, I can do that
<scribe> ACTION: Marcos create an alternative mechanism for openURL
and send it to the mail list [recorded in
[17]http://www.w3.org/2010/08/05-wam-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-568 - Create an alternative mechanism for
openURL and send it to the mail list [on Marcos Caceres - due
2010-08-12].
MC: I also looked at removing the Web IDL ref
... it is a lot more than difficult than I would have guessed
... and even if we do that, we still have HTML and Web Storage refs
AB: given those dependencies, I don't think it make sense to remove
the Web IDL ref
MC: agreed
AB: after the group discusses your openURL alternate proposal, then
we can get formal consensus on removing openURL or not
... if the group accepts this change, the TWI spec will need to go
back to LCWD
... but since we already have more than 2 implementations that pass
the TWI test suite,
... we can skip another CR and go straight to PR
... anything else on the TWI spec for today?
MC: no
AOB
<timeless> oh
<timeless> perhaps action to look at mozilla's package thing
<timeless> marcos, can you drop in a link
MC: I'm wondering if we should put some effort into the old P&C
conformance spec
... we could publish it again
AB: could it be published as an informative WG Note
JS: It is OK with me if openURL is removed
... I agree decision on Web IDL
<Marcos>
[18]http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg22629.htm
l
[18] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg22629.html
JS: there was some discussion about web app packging on WHAT WG list
this week
... should review this email
... don't think we want them to reinvent the wheels we created in
WebApps
AB: thanks for the headsup
MC: the BONDI SDK implemented a conformance checker
AB: agree that functionality could be useful for Widget developers
MC: we have some tests for WARP spec
AB: that's great
MC: we updated the template for test suite generation
<Marcos> [19]http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/test-suite/
[19] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/test-suite/
MC: we are working on the dig sig tests
AB: re, next call, I think we need Robin
MC: agree
AB: tentatively schedule a call for next week but only if we can get
Robin
... it would be good to get that to Candidate as soon as possible
... meeting adjourned
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Marcos create an alternative mechanism for openURL and
send it to the mail list [recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2010/08/05-wam-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Marcos notify the I18N Core WG about the I18N test
cases and ask them for comments [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2010/08/05-wam-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]
