/irc-logs / w3c / #webapps / 2008-08-05 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Tue Aug 05 00:00:00 2008
  2. # Session Ident: #webapps
  3. # [00:15] * Quits: marcos (marcos@124.171.129.80) (Ping timeout)
  4. # [00:20] * Joins: marcos (marcos@124.171.203.244)
  5. # [00:29] * Quits: marcos (marcos@124.171.203.244) (Quit: marcos)
  6. # [00:30] * Joins: marcos (marcos@124.171.203.244)
  7. # [00:34] * Quits: marcos (marcos@124.171.203.244) (Quit: marcos)
  8. # [00:41] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.203.15.230)
  9. # [00:41] * Joins: marcos (marcos@124.171.203.244)
  10. # [00:44] * Quits: marcos (marcos@124.171.203.244) (Quit: marcos)
  11. # [00:57] * Quits: aroben (aroben@71.58.56.76) (Connection reset by peer)
  12. # [01:10] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.203.15.230) (Quit: mjs)
  13. # [01:17] * Quits: tlr (tlr@128.30.52.30) (Quit: tlr)
  14. # [01:32] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.203.15.230)
  15. # [02:15] * Joins: ArtB (c0646811@128.30.52.43)
  16. # [02:16] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.203.15.230) (Quit: mjs)
  17. # [02:21] * Joins: marcos (marcos@131.181.148.227)
  18. # [02:42] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.97.30)
  19. # [02:42] * Joins: mjs_ (mjs@17.203.15.230)
  20. # [02:45] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.97.30) (Ping timeout)
  21. # [02:49] * ArtB changes topic to 'Web Applications WG'
  22. # [02:58] * Quits: ArtB (c0646811@128.30.52.43) (Quit: CGI:IRC (Ping timeout))
  23. # [02:59] * Joins: harry (kcome@222.95.26.17)
  24. # [03:25] * Quits: sicking (chatzilla@63.245.220.241) (Client exited)
  25. # [04:43] * Joins: smaug (chatzilla@91.154.44.94)
  26. # [06:10] * Quits: marcos (marcos@131.181.148.227) (Quit: marcos)
  27. # [06:18] * Quits: mjs_ (mjs@17.203.15.230) (Ping timeout)
  28. # [06:18] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.97.30)
  29. # [06:30] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.97.30) (Quit: mjs)
  30. # [06:42] * Joins: heycam (cam@130.194.72.84)
  31. # [06:43] <heycam> shepazu, yt?
  32. # [06:55] * Quits: heycam (cam@130.194.72.84) (Quit: bye)
  33. # [07:23] * Joins: mjs (mjs@24.5.43.151)
  34. # [07:54] * Quits: weinig (weinig@17.203.14.254) (Quit: weinig)
  35. # [08:28] * Joins: marcos (marcos@131.181.148.227)
  36. # [08:42] * Joins: weinig (weinig@71.198.176.23)
  37. # [08:43] * Joins: heycam (cam@124.168.12.194)
  38. # [09:02] * Joins: arve (arve@213.236.208.22)
  39. # [09:05] * Quits: mjs (mjs@24.5.43.151) (Quit: mjs)
  40. # [09:13] * Joins: mjs (mjs@24.5.43.151)
  41. # [09:42] * Quits: smaug (chatzilla@91.154.44.94) (Client exited)
  42. # [09:43] * Joins: smaug (chatzilla@91.154.44.94)
  43. # [09:55] <marcos> arve, yt?
  44. # [09:56] <arve> sort of
  45. # [09:56] <marcos> hehe. I'm wondering if you have seen http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2008JulSep/0298.html ?
  46. # [09:57] <arve> not had a time to follow up on anything w3c-related since last teleconf, so sorry
  47. # [09:57] <arve> I'll have a look later today
  48. # [09:58] <marcos> ok. I'm concerned about some of the things being requested in that email. I think it might be important for you to look at
  49. # [09:58] <marcos> (manly because I need support in rejecting certain aspects)
  50. # [09:59] <marcos> :)
  51. # [10:02] * Joins: arve_ (arve@213.236.208.247)
  52. # [10:04] * Quits: arve (arve@213.236.208.22) (Ping timeout)
  53. # [10:04] * arve_ is now known as arve
  54. # [10:13] * Joins: arve_ (arve@213.236.208.247)
  55. # [10:13] * Quits: arve_ (arve@213.236.208.247) (Quit: Leaving)
  56. # [10:16] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246) (Client exited)
  57. # [10:43] * Quits: arve (arve@213.236.208.247) (Quit: Leaving)
  58. # [10:44] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  59. # [10:44] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246) (Client exited)
  60. # [10:44] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  61. # [10:44] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246) (Client exited)
  62. # [10:45] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  63. # [10:45] * Joins: arve (arve@213.236.208.247)
  64. # [11:18] * Joins: tlr (tlr@128.30.52.30)
  65. # [11:24] * Quits: arve (arve@213.236.208.247) (Ping timeout)
  66. # [11:29] * Quits: mjs (mjs@24.5.43.151) (Quit: mjs)
  67. # [11:30] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  68. # [11:41] * Joins: arve (arve@213.236.208.22)
  69. # [11:51] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22)
  70. # [12:23] * Joins: ArtB (ce846302@128.30.52.43)
  71. # [12:23] * marcos impressed by ArtB joining the channel at 6am!
  72. # [12:25] <shepazu> heycam: yo
  73. # [12:26] * ArtB needs massive amounts of coffee :-)
  74. # [12:26] <marcos> hehe
  75. # [12:27] * shepazu is lucky never to have gotten on the coffee monkey
  76. # [12:28] * shepazu is driven by sheer paranoia :)
  77. # [12:28] * marcos only got that monkey off his back about 4 months ago. I found it makes no difference (except I no longer get headaches when I don't have it!)
  78. # [12:29] <marcos> life editin specs' is a rush, man! :P
  79. # [12:29] <shepazu> oh, you sad little man
  80. # [12:29] <marcos> hehe
  81. # [12:29] <shepazu> :)
  82. # [12:30] <marcos> Shapazu, did you see the interview I did with Harry Halpin?
  83. # [12:30] <shepazu> I saw the first part... I intend to watch the rest tomorrow
  84. # [12:31] <marcos> oh ok. He's a crazy fun dude :) I really liked hanging out with him while I was in the UK.
  85. # [12:32] <marcos> I'm hoping he will come to TPAC.
  86. # [12:33] <shepazu> yeah, Harry's awesome
  87. # [12:33] <shepazu> he's like a standards rockstar
  88. # [12:34] <marcos> hehe; I don't doubt it.
  89. # [12:38] <marcos> Arve (or anyone or twitterverse :P ), why is multi-part MIME unsuitable for widget packaging?
  90. # [12:51] <marcos> argh... I hate it when I need to learn new stuff and do my own thinking...
  91. # [12:51] <marcos> :)
  92. # [13:11] <marcos> Ok, keeping in mind I don't really know MIME, here are some thoughts as to why MIME is unsuitable:
  93. # [13:11] <marcos> 1. lack of packaging tools for MIME (zip is more prevalent and ships with almost every OS)
  94. # [13:11] <marcos> 2. difficult for authors to work with compared to zip: zip is built into many operating systems (such as WindowsXP/Vista) and allows authors to easily modify the content of packages.
  95. # [13:11] <marcos> 3. lack of compression
  96. # [13:11] <marcos> 4. all widget engines already support Zip, so using MIME would be "going against the grain" with regards to standardization and would delay implementation as widget engines may need to be significantly changed to support MIME.
  97. # [13:14] <arve> marcos: 1) Lack of Tools
  98. # [13:14] <arve> 2) Compression inefficiency
  99. # [13:14] <marcos> you are just using fancy words for what i said :)
  100. # [13:15] <arve> there is basically a 8/6 inefficiency you suffer for Base-64
  101. # [13:15] <marcos> I need to convince the TAG to stop pushing MIME on us
  102. # [13:16] <arve> [hidden]
  103. # [13:16] <arve> That zip is ubiquotus should alone be enough
  104. # [13:16] <marcos> yeah, that's what I think too
  105. # [13:17] <arve> browsers/UAs already support zip
  106. # [13:17] <arve> supporting multipart is, at best, a bolt-on in FF
  107. # [13:17] <arve> and I know of exactly zero tools that will allow me to to take a lump of files from a disk and create a sensible multipart
  108. # [13:19] <arve> and I do not believe that parties who've invested in the widget economy/landscape are willing to wait until 2012 for the same tool support
  109. # [13:20] <arve> if anything, I think we should specify the relevant subset of zip in an open industry group
  110. # [13:21] <marcos> I guess that's what we will have in the packaging spec.
  111. # [13:21] <marcos> (the relevant subset)
  112. # [13:22] <arve> marcos: well, we do so by reference
  113. # [13:22] <arve> I'd ideally like to see the compression algorithms in such a separate spec
  114. # [13:23] <marcos> Well, we only support one at the moment. And it is in a separate spec.
  115. # [13:23] <marcos> so your wish may already have come true
  116. # [13:26] <marcos> Deflate: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1951
  117. # [13:26] <marcos> if that is what you mean
  118. # [13:32] * Quits: harry (kcome@222.95.26.17) (Ping timeout)
  119. # [13:32] * Joins: harry (kcome@117.88.174.224)
  120. # [13:54] <heycam> hi shepazu
  121. # [13:54] <heycam> was just gonna ask about web idl publication
  122. # [14:00] <heycam> but just saw a mail from mike, so dw
  123. # [14:01] <MikeSmith> heycam: you OK with changing the bit of text that shepazu mentioned?
  124. # [14:01] <heycam> yup
  125. # [14:01] <heycam> just replying to the mail
  126. # [14:02] <MikeSmith> k
  127. # [14:04] <ArtB> marcos, I started to scan OMTP's security requirements input
  128. # [14:05] <marcos> great, any thoughts?
  129. # [14:05] <ArtB> Comments on R11 actually introduce several new requirements
  130. # [14:05] * marcos takes a look
  131. # [14:06] <ArtB> page 4 of the PDF
  132. # [14:07] <heycam> google maps street view just came to aus
  133. # [14:07] <heycam> it's nifty :)
  134. # [14:08] <marcos> yeah, I noticed that this morning
  135. # [14:08] <marcos> I was looking for a new bike route to get to uni
  136. # [14:09] <ArtB> arve, have you read OMTP's security requirements input?
  137. # [14:09] <marcos> artb, I think Thomas needs to review that.
  138. # [14:09] <marcos> Cert chains are beyond the scope of my knowledge
  139. # [14:10] <arve> ArtB: as I said to marcos earlier today: haven't had time to review it
  140. # [14:10] <marcos> It sounds like they are getting very complicated. I hope the complexity they want to introduce is something people are already using. I have to assume it is.
  141. # [14:10] <ArtB> I agree with getting tlr's input
  142. # [14:11] <ArtB> I also think we should ask the XML Sec WG to review it
  143. # [14:11] <arve> but, on skimming
  144. # [14:11] <arve> " A conforming
  145. # [14:11] <arve> specification SHALL specify that if none of the signatures and certificate
  146. # [14:11] <arve> chains can be verified, e.g. because of missing root certificates or where any
  147. # [14:11] <arve> certificates in the chain have expired or are not yet valid, then the widget
  148. # [14:11] <arve> resource SHALL be treated as unsigned.
  149. # [14:11] <arve> "
  150. # [14:11] <marcos> yeah, that's not good
  151. # [14:11] <arve> I think that needs at the very least s/unsigned/invalid/
  152. # [14:11] <marcos> shall be treated as invalid
  153. # [14:12] <marcos> I wonder if that was a mistake on their part?
  154. # [14:12] <ArtB> This is going to result in a lot of signature requirements
  155. # [14:13] <ArtB> Not that that is bad ...
  156. # [14:13] <marcos> Yeah, I just hope they have the expertise to be able to help spec the thing
  157. # [14:13] <marcos> They seem confident that they do
  158. # [14:13] <ArtB> But I wonder if they should be added to the widgets signature spec ?
  159. # [14:13] <arve> Re R.43
  160. # [14:14] <arve> I think we need roughly what Opera has proposed in the path
  161. # [14:15] <marcos> I sent them the stuff you proposed
  162. # [14:15] <marcos> by you, I mean Opera
  163. # [14:16] <arve> good
  164. # [14:16] <arve> re "Independence of Non-Security Critical Information from Digital Signature"
  165. # [14:16] <marcos> I told them to review that and align their proposals with that input
  166. # [14:16] <arve> I don't really get what they're after
  167. # [14:17] <arve> as I read it, that complicates signing to the extreme
  168. # [14:17] <marcos> yeah, I don't like that one
  169. # [14:18] <marcos> I think it's all or nothing
  170. # [14:18] <marcos> either you sign everything or you sign nothing
  171. # [14:19] <arve> agreed
  172. # [14:19] <arve> the cost-of resigning is negligble
  173. # [14:21] <marcos> Artb, I'd like to keep the requirements in one place. Keeps the other documents smaller
  174. # [14:21] <arve> <mycustomnamespace:foo url="..." /> in config.xml
  175. # [14:21] <arve> is that security-sensitive or not
  176. # [14:21] <arve> and who decides
  177. # [14:22] <marcos> yeah, good point
  178. # [14:23] <ArtB> marcos, I don't feel strongly about where the reqs are documented and will defer to the people doing the real editing :-)
  179. # [14:24] <marcos> Artb, Arve, I'm also concerned about R21 proposed in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2008JulSep/att-0298/MWBP_comments_to_Widget_Requirements_Last_Call_WD.htm
  180. # [14:24] <ArtB> marcos, arve - should we discuss OMTP's security document on the agenda for our Aug 7 call?
  181. # [14:24] <marcos> yep
  182. # [14:25] <arve> ArtB: absolutely
  183. # [14:25] <marcos> that will probably eat up the whole meeting
  184. # [14:25] <arve> marcos: concerned how?
  185. # [14:26] <ArtB> OK, we can start with their comments on R11 and R38 and then their proposed new reqs related to signatures
  186. # [14:26] <arve> apart from the "screen operation" bit, this seems mostly in line with my <api src="..."> proposal
  187. # [14:27] <marcos> Well, it's dumb. If I test my widget on a device that is super fast/good, then why would I declare that it is a resource hog? Also, if a widget uses a lot of resources on one device, it might not use a lot on another
  188. # [14:28] <ArtB> I think I understand what MWBP is after in R21 but I don't think the proposed wording captures what they want
  189. # [14:28] <marcos> Worst still, it might just be that the implementation sucks
  190. # [14:28] <arve> marcos: yes, in that context, I can understand your concern
  191. # [14:28] <marcos> It seems to make the assumption that implementations are agnostic to resource allocation, etc
  192. # [14:29] <arve> there's stuff there that's so horribly implementation-dependent
  193. # [14:29] <arve> memory use being one (and next to impossible to declare with a GC language driving the app)
  194. # [14:29] <marcos> exactly
  195. # [14:29] <marcos> Artb, what do you think they mean?
  196. # [14:30] <arve> however, I'm fine with keeping something about requiring network use
  197. # [14:30] <arve> if it's not quantified, at least
  198. # [14:31] <ArtB> As Arve suggested, I *think* the <api src=""> is the type of mechanism they envision; could be wrong though ...
  199. # [14:31] <marcos> I hope so, but they talk about Ontologies and things
  200. # [14:32] <marcos> the UWA’s Delivery Context Ontology
  201. # [14:32] <ArtB> yes; we'll have to set aside some discussion time for their input too ...
  202. # [14:32] * marcos gets dizzy when he hears UWA’s Delivery Context Ontology
  203. # [14:33] <marcos> Arve, any thoughts on: Rxx. User-Agent Profile Header
  204. # [14:33] <marcos>
  205. # [14:33] <marcos> A conforming specification must specify that the widget should identify its capabilities in HTTP requests through the Profile header as described by [CCPPexchange] (http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-CCPPexchange).
  206. # [14:33] <marcos>
  207. # [14:34] <arve> Overkill, no?
  208. # [14:34] <ArtB> There is some serious conflating of requirements on Specification versus requirements on instances of Widgets
  209. # [14:34] <marcos> yeah, I was going to say. Does anyone use that stuff?
  210. # [14:34] <marcos> Artb, agreed
  211. # [14:35] * ArtB needs to take a call ...
  212. # [14:35] * ArtB is now known as ArtB_
  213. # [14:36] * heycam growls at dev.w3.org
  214. # [14:41] * Quits: gDashiva (magnusrk@195.18.164.170) (Ping timeout)
  215. # [14:41] * Joins: gDashiva (magnusrk@195.18.164.170)
  216. # [14:45] * Quits: inimino (weechat@67.207.138.202) (Ping timeout)
  217. # [14:45] * Quits: hendry (hendry@89.16.172.32) (Ping timeout)
  218. # [14:46] * Joins: inimino (weechat@67.207.138.202)
  219. # [14:47] * Joins: hendry (hendry@89.16.172.32)
  220. # [15:14] * ArtB_ is now known as ArtB
  221. # [15:15] <marcos> Artb, I'm heading home. Will you be around tomorrow to discuss some more of the feedback?
  222. # [15:16] <ArtB> marcos, yes I'll be in tomorrow
  223. # [15:16] <marcos> great
  224. # [15:16] <ArtB> I'll send out the Aug 7 agenda later today and it will focus on the OMTP signature input
  225. # [15:20] <marcos> sounds good. I'll try to finish Chris' comments and hopefully some others.
  226. # [15:21] * Quits: marcos (marcos@131.181.148.227) (Quit: ...and I'm gone. )
  227. # [15:56] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22) (Client exited)
  228. # [15:57] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22)
  229. # [17:35] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  230. # [17:37] * Quits: weinig (weinig@71.198.176.23) (Quit: weinig)
  231. # [17:52] * Joins: weinig (weinig@76.203.74.176)
  232. # [17:54] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  233. # [19:07] * Quits: harry (kcome@117.88.174.224) (Ping timeout)
  234. # [19:21] * Quits: weinig (weinig@76.203.74.176) (Quit: weinig)
  235. # [19:22] * Joins: timeless (timeless@65.75.195.122)
  236. # [19:31] * Joins: harry (kcome@58.212.36.204)
  237. # [19:37] * Joins: aroben (aroben@71.58.56.76)
  238. # [19:57] * Quits: arve (arve@213.236.208.22) (Quit: Leaving)
  239. # [20:03] * Quits: harry (kcome@58.212.36.204) (Ping timeout)
  240. # [21:03] * Quits: ArtB (ce846302@128.30.52.43) (Quit: CGI:IRC)
  241. # [21:11] * tlr is now known as tlr-off
  242. # [21:15] * Joins: mjs (mjs@24.5.43.151)
  243. # [21:47] * Joins: ArtB (c0646811@128.30.52.43)
  244. # [22:11] * Joins: weinig (weinig@17.203.14.254)
  245. # [22:40] * Joins: arve (arve@80.203.77.192)
  246. # [22:47] * Quits: mjs (mjs@24.5.43.151) (Quit: mjs)
  247. # [22:55] * Quits: weinig (weinig@17.203.14.254) (Quit: weinig)
  248. # [23:00] * Quits: arve (arve@80.203.77.192) (Quit: Leaving)
  249. # [23:04] * Joins: weinig (weinig@17.203.14.254)
  250. # [23:21] * Quits: tlr-off (tlr@128.30.52.30) (Client exited)
  251. # [23:22] * Joins: tlr (tlr@128.30.52.30)
  252. # [23:46] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.203.15.230)
  253. # Session Close: Wed Aug 06 00:00:00 2008

The end :)