/irc-logs / w3c / #webapps / 2010-08-12 / end
Options:
- # Session Start: Thu Aug 12 00:00:00 2010
- # Session Ident: #webapps
- # [00:06] * Joins: taf2 (taf2@173.13.232.33)
- # [00:06] * Quits: taf2 (taf2@173.13.232.33) (Quit: taf2)
- # [00:35] * Joins: karl (karlcow@128.30.54.58)
- # [01:34] * Quits: sicking (chatzilla@63.245.220.240) (Ping timeout)
- # [01:35] * Joins: sicking (chatzilla@63.245.220.240)
- # [02:50] * Quits: Nikunj (Adium@64.186.167.205) (Quit: Leaving.)
- # [03:45] * Joins: Nikunj (Adium@67.188.172.4)
- # [03:59] * Quits: sicking (chatzilla@63.245.220.240) (Ping timeout)
- # [04:16] * Quits: Nikunj (Adium@67.188.172.4) (Quit: Leaving.)
- # [04:36] * Joins: Nikunj (Adium@67.188.172.4)
- # [04:36] * Quits: Nikunj (Adium@67.188.172.4) (Quit: Leaving.)
- # [05:08] * Quits: timeless_mbp (timeless@88.115.8.36) (Quit: Leaving.)
- # [05:48] * Quits: Martijnc (Martijnc@91.176.91.217) (Ping timeout)
- # [05:53] * Joins: Martijnc (Martijnc@91.176.91.217)
- # [06:02] * Joins: timeless_mbp (timeless@88.115.8.36)
- # [06:21] * Disconnected
- # [06:22] * Attempting to rejoin channel #webapps
- # [06:22] * Rejoined channel #webapps
- # [06:22] * Topic is 'WebApps, Web Notifications, Web Timing, Oh My; This channel is logged: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/'
- # [06:22] * Set by ArtB on Tue Jun 29 12:53:08
- # [07:05] * Joins: Nikunj (Adium@67.188.172.4)
- # [07:51] * Quits: Nikunj (Adium@67.188.172.4) (Quit: Leaving.)
- # [09:42] * Joins: Marcos (Marcos@213.236.208.22)
- # [10:28] * Quits: anne (annevk@213.236.208.247) (Ping timeout)
- # [10:29] * Quits: Marcos (Marcos@213.236.208.22) (Ping timeout)
- # [11:05] * Quits: timeless_mbp (timeless@88.115.8.36) (Quit: Leaving.)
- # [11:14] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@84.215.59.50)
- # [11:19] * Joins: timeless_mbp (timeless@192.100.124.156)
- # [11:20] * Quits: timeless_mbp (timeless@192.100.124.156) (Client exited)
- # [11:24] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@84.215.59.50) (Quit: Leaving)
- # [11:26] * Joins: tlr (tlr@128.30.52.169)
- # [11:37] * Joins: sicking (chatzilla@98.210.155.80)
- # [12:44] * Joins: ArtB (chatzilla@192.100.104.17)
- # [12:53] * Joins: Marcos (Marcos@195.189.143.116)
- # [12:59] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@195.189.143.116)
- # [13:02] * Quits: Marcos (Marcos@195.189.143.116) (Ping timeout)
- # [13:07] * Joins: Marcos (Marcos@195.189.143.116)
- # [13:28] * Quits: Marcos (Marcos@195.189.143.116) (Quit: Marcos)
- # [13:38] * Quits: ArtB (chatzilla@192.100.104.17) (Client exited)
- # [14:12] * Joins: ArtB (chatzilla@192.100.124.219)
- # [14:47] * Joins: wonsuk (wslee@59.25.92.126)
- # [14:50] * Joins: manu (chatzilla@96.240.167.183)
- # [14:57] * Joins: darobin (robin@92.131.221.106)
- # [15:04] * wonsuk Present+ Wonsuk_Lee
- # [15:05] <ArtB> Topic: Review and tweak agenda
- # [15:05] <ArtB> AB: the draft agenda was posted yesterday ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JulSep/0447.html ). The two specs on the agenda are Widget Interface and the Widget URI scheme. Any change requests?
- # [15:05] <ArtB> RT: I would like to talk about Widget Updates spec
- # [15:05] <ArtB> AB: ok, will add that to the end of the meeting
- # [15:06] <ArtB> Topic: Announcements
- # [15:06] <ArtB> AB: any short announcements today?
- # [15:06] <ArtB> Topic: TWI spec: Action-568
- # [15:06] <ArtB> AB: earlier this week discussion on openURL removal continued ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JulSep/0394.html )
- # [15:07] <ArtB> AB: Bryan Sullivan had some comments
- # [15:07] <ArtB> ... I was hoping Bryan would join today but he hasn't
- # [15:07] <ArtB> AB: I believe Marcos position is very clear
- # [15:07] <ArtB> ... he wants it removed from the spec
- # [15:08] <ArtB> RB: as far as I am concerned, agree it is useful
- # [15:08] <ArtB> ... but it is also problematic
- # [15:08] <ArtB> ... Think it should be solved somewhere else
- # [15:08] <ArtB> RT: yes, there is a complexity issue here
- # [15:08] <ArtB> ... so I agree with Marcos and Robin
- # [15:09] <ArtB> RB: if we remove it, we should be able to go straight to REC
- # [15:09] <ArtB> AB: we could go to PR but not REC because of some dependency issues
- # [15:09] <ArtB> RB: dependency on HTML5?
- # [15:09] <ArtB> AB: yes that is one
- # [15:10] * Joins: richt (richt@84.215.178.93)
- # [15:10] * Joins: anne5 (annevk@195.189.143.116)
- # [15:10] <ArtB> AB: I also tend to agree with the arguments to remove the functionality
- # [15:10] <ArtB> ... and defer to some other spec for equivalent functionality
- # [15:11] <ArtB> AB: I'll start an explict CfC about removing this method from the spec
- # [15:11] <darobin> +1
- # [15:11] <ArtB> ... I'd like to make sure everyone has an opportunity to state their position
- # [15:11] <richt> yep, sounds good
- # [15:11] <ArtB> ACTION: barstow start a CfC about openURL and Action-568
- # [15:11] * trackbot noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
- # [15:11] <trackbot> Created ACTION-569 - Start a CfC about openURL and Action-568 [on Arthur Barstow - due 2010-08-19].
- # [15:11] <ArtB> AB: anything else on that topic for today?
- # [15:12] <ArtB> [ No ]
- # [15:12] <ArtB> Topic: URI Scheme spec
- # [15:12] * Parts: manu (chatzilla@96.240.167.183)
- # [15:12] <ArtB> AB: it has been a while since we discussed the widget: scheme spec ( http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/waf/widgets-uri/ )
- # [15:12] <ArtB> AB: what's the status and plan?
- # [15:12] <ArtB> RB: I still need to address some issues
- # [15:12] <ArtB> ... I plan to make it a priority
- # [15:13] <ArtB> ... hope to finish by the end of the month
- # [15:13] <ArtB> ... I know the action items
- # [15:13] <ArtB> AB: ok, great
- # [15:14] * richt nothing to report on that point
- # [15:14] <ArtB> AB: does anyone have any implementation status for this spec?
- # [15:14] <ArtB> RB: I found it easy to implement
- # [15:14] <ArtB> AB: the spec says authors shouldn't use this scheme
- # [15:14] <ArtB> ... so what's the use case
- # [15:15] <ArtB> RB: when using the DOM, need to determine an absolute URI
- # [15:15] <ArtB> ... so impls need it
- # [15:15] <ArtB> ... it could also to lead to security hole if an implementor was to use something like a file: URI
- # [15:15] <ArtB> ... at runtime it is needed
- # [15:15] <ArtB> ... e.g. to reuse a web runtime engine
- # [15:16] <richt> It's a very useful spec and I believe we require it for impl. down the line.
- # [15:16] <richt> ...at Opera
- # [15:16] <ArtB> AB: anything else on that spec?
- # [15:16] <ArtB> RT: we use it for some projects
- # [15:16] <ArtB> ... good to get rid of the file: issue
- # [15:17] <ArtB> Topic: Widget Updates spec
- # [15:17] <richt> widgets updates: http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-updates/
- # [15:17] * richt :-)
- # [15:17] <ArtB> RT: I've been working with Marcos on this spec
- # [15:17] <ArtB> ... clarified update description
- # [15:18] <ArtB> ... started an alogorithm to do the update
- # [15:18] <ArtB> ... would like to get some feedback
- # [15:18] <ArtB> AB: I haven't looked at the changes
- # [15:18] <ArtB> RB: same here although I will do so shortly
- # [15:19] <ArtB> RT: addresses comparing signatures for the installed widget and the update widget
- # [15:19] <ArtB> ... so please do take a look
- # [15:19] <ArtB> AB: to get broader review, it often helps to publish a new version
- # [15:20] <ArtB> AB: when will it be ready for a new pub?
- # [15:20] <ArtB> RT: I have another couple of weeks of work to do before it is ready
- # [15:20] <ArtB> AB: ok, that sounds good
- # [15:20] <richt> I want to clarify the Verification Process as it is largely just a placeholder at present
- # [15:21] <ArtB> AB: perhaps we can put it on the agenda for the next call which is probably in 2 weeks
- # [15:21] <ArtB> RT: any feedback now would be good
- # [15:21] <ArtB> AB: I'll ask for internal review
- # [15:22] <ArtB> AB: are there some existing protocols this functionality could be layered on?
- # [15:22] <ArtB> ... e.g. the DM stuff from OMA
- # [15:23] <ArtB> RT: yes, there is some existing work to consider
- # [15:23] <ArtB> ... if you have related feedback, that would be useful
- # [15:25] <ArtB> AB: anything else on Updates spec for today?
- # [15:25] <ArtB> RT: not from me
- # [15:25] <ArtB> Topic: AoB
- # [15:25] <ArtB> AB: anything else for today?
- # [15:25] <ArtB> AB: the bulk of the remaining work for the widget specs is test cases
- # [15:26] <ArtB> ... and it is great to see that Opera is contributing in that area
- # [15:26] <ArtB> ... e.g. DigSig tests and WARP tests
- # [15:27] <ArtB> AB: next call will be August 26 if there is something to discuss otherwise, September 2
- # [15:27] <ArtB> AB: let's continue to use public-webapps so that we can eliminate and/or shorten our voice conferences
- # [15:27] <ArtB> AB: meeting adjourned
- # [15:28] <ArtB> RRSAgent, make minutes
- # [15:29] * Parts: wonsuk (wslee@59.25.92.126)
- # [15:39] * Quits: sicking (chatzilla@98.210.155.80) (Ping timeout)
- # [15:53] * Joins: Nikunj (Adium@67.188.172.4)
- # [16:09] * Quits: darobin (robin@92.131.221.106) (Ping timeout)
- # [16:13] * Quits: richt (richt@84.215.178.93) (Client exited)
- # [16:23] * Joins: smaug (chatzilla@91.154.40.172)
- # [16:40] * Quits: Nikunj (Adium@67.188.172.4) (Quit: Leaving.)
- # [18:33] * Joins: sicking (chatzilla@98.210.155.80)
- # [18:42] * Quits: anne5 (annevk@195.189.143.116) (Quit: anne5)
- # [18:53] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@114.48.168.248)
- # [18:56] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@195.189.143.116) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
- # [19:04] * Quits: sicking (chatzilla@98.210.155.80) (Ping timeout)
- # [19:09] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@84.215.59.50)
- # [19:09] * Quits: tlr (tlr@128.30.52.169) (Quit: tlr)
- # [19:23] * Joins: Nikunj (Adium@64.186.167.205)
- # [19:23] * Joins: Nikunj1 (Adium@64.186.167.205)
- # [19:23] * Quits: Nikunj (Adium@64.186.167.205) (Connection reset by peer)
- # [19:23] * Quits: Nikunj1 (Adium@64.186.167.205) (Client exited)
- # [19:24] * Joins: Nikunj (Adium@64.186.167.205)
- # [19:33] * Joins: sicking (chatzilla@98.210.155.80)
- # [19:54] * Joins: MikeSmithX (MikeSmith@114.48.137.188)
- # [19:55] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@114.48.168.248) (Ping timeout)
- # [22:27] <smaug> shepazu: was my test enough
- # [22:27] <smaug> shepazu: at least it shows that prevValue is implemented
- # [22:28] <shepazu> smaug: yes, now we need to decide what to do :(
- # [22:28] <shepazu> make it a must, should, or may?
- # [22:28] <smaug> whatever newValue has
- # [22:28] <smaug> I still don't understand why it is slow for IE9
- # [22:28] <shepazu> I don't either
- # [22:29] <shepazu> that makes no sense to me
- # [22:29] <smaug> it is basically "take reference to old value, modify the node value, dispatch event with old and new value"
- # [22:30] <smaug> and if there are no mutation event listeners, no need to take old value nor dispatch the event
- # [22:31] <shepazu> right
- # [22:32] <shepazu> and the ref to prevValue can just be a pointer, no need to carry the entire message
- # [22:32] <shepazu> and you can wipe it immediately after
- # [23:06] * Quits: MikeSmithX (MikeSmith@114.48.137.188) (Quit: Till kicked and torn and beaten out he lies, and leaves his hold and crackles, groans, and dies.)
- # [23:29] * Quits: smaug (chatzilla@91.154.40.172) (Ping timeout)
- # [23:46] * Quits: ArtB (chatzilla@192.100.124.219) (Quit: Happy trails ...)
- # [23:54] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@84.215.59.50) (Quit: Leaving)
- # [23:54] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@84.215.59.50)
- # Session Close: Fri Aug 13 00:00:00 2010
The end :)