The mission of the System Applications Working Group is to define a runtime environment, security model, and associated APIs for building Web applications with comparable capabilities to native applications. This requires stronger integration with the host platform than is the case for traditional web pages. Browsers are designed to cope with the user visiting untrusted web sites, necessitating a cautious approach to security that narrowly limits what a particular website can do. The contrast between the two contexts can be illustrated by comparing a) an application with limited access to specific fields in the user's contacts, and b) an application that implements a contacts manager, where the application is entrusted with the ability to access, create, delete and update entries.
Join the System Applications Working Group.
End date | 1 October 2014 |
---|---|
Confidentiality | Proceedings are Public |
Chairs | Adam Barth, Google Wonsuk Lee, Samsung |
Team Contact (FTE %: 30) |
Dave Raggett |
Usual Meeting Schedule | Teleconferences: approximately 1 per week. Face-to-face: up to 3-4
per year as needed. IRC: active participants, particularly editors, regularly use the #sysapps W3C IRC channel |
The System Applications Working Group aims to produce a runtime environment and a set of APIs that let trusted applications integrate closely with the operating system's functionality, thereby expanding the potential for a new breed of web applications.
The scope of the System Applications Working Group covers the technologies related to developing Web application that integrate closely with a host operating system, including a runtime environment (with both an execution model and a security model) as well as markup vocabularies and APIs for describing and controlling the application's interaction with the host operating system.
The Working Group will focus on those operating system interactions that cannot be exposed safely to Web applications executing in the traditional browser security model. The Working Group will consider a broad category of host operating systems, including those running on desktop computers, laptop computers, smart phones, tablets, TVs, cameras, and other connected devices.
Priority will be given to developing simple and uncontroversial APIs, leaving more complex features to future work. The Group should adopt, refine and when needed, extend existing solutions where possible. Some deliverables will only be applicable for platforms with the requisite hardware.
The Working Group is expected to deliver APIs designed for use with JavaScript. Bindings to other languages may be defined if appropriate.
In general, all APIs defined for Web applications executing in the traditional browser security model, e.g. the W3C DAP APIs, should be accessible from within the execution and security model specified by the System Applications Working Group. Any issues with duplication of security functionality, for example double security prompts, must be addressed.
This Working Group’s deliverables must address issues of accessibility, internationalization, mobility, security and privacy.
The Working Group will adopt best practice for marking up normative requirements, development of test suites, and production of implementation reports. The group will also maintain errata as required for the continued relevance and usefulness of the specifications it produces.
To advance to Proposed Recommendation, each specification is expected to have two independent implementations of all features defined in the specification, including implementation on a constrained device (e.g. mobile phone, TV, or camera).
The working group will deliver the specifications listed below. In a number of cases, pointers have been provided to existing documents that address requirements similar to those of given deliverables. These are provided solely as aids to the review process and one should not presume that the cited documents will be submitted to W3C or that the deliverable developed by the group will take one of these for its starting point. Additional information can be obtained through the B2G WebAPI document, and the Apache Cordova Documentation).
The working group's deliverables are divided into two phases. In phase 1, the working group will focus on the execution and security models, and validating them through work on a small set of specific APIs. This will be used to establish the patterns and conventions that will be used for the remaining deliverables. The working group does not need to complete work on all the phase 1 deliverables before starting work on deliverables in phase 2. However, the working group should make substantial progress on some of the phase 1 deliverables before working on phase 2 deliverables, at which point it should be possible to do more work in parallel.
The following are in alphabetical order and it is up to the Working Group to determine the priority attached to work on each API.
These are in alphabetical order and it is up to the Working Group to determine the priority attached to work on each API.
Note that where applicable, the group is free to split the above deliverables into several smaller specifications that collectively address the same space, or conversely to join some of the above into a single specification.
Where practical, the API specifications should use the Web IDL formalism.
Each specification must contain a section detailing any known security and privacy implications for implementers, authors, and end users. The Working Group will actively seek security and privacy review on all its specifications.
The Working Group may also enter into joint Task Forces with other groups (in particular with the Web Applications and Device APIs Working Groups), to collaborate on the deliverables above if specifications cross group boundaries.
A test suite for all features of a specification is necessary to ensure the specification’s robustness, consistency, and implementability, and to promote interoperability between User Agents. Therefore, each specification must have a companion test suite, which should be completed by the end of the Last Call phase, and must be completed, with an implementation report, before transition from Candidate Recommendation to Proposed Recommendation. Additional tests may be added to the test suite at any stage of the Recommendation track, and the maintenance of a implementation report is encouraged.
The Working Group may also document in a Working Group Note the useful design patterns shared by the APIs it is developing.
Other non-normative documents may be created such as:
Given sufficient resources, this Working Group should review other working groups’ deliverables that are identified as being relevant to the Working Group’s mission.
The Working Group will maintain an updated timeline of its deliverables on its home page.
The first priority will be to reach a consensus on the Security Model and the Execution Model, and to deliver First Public Working Drafts for these within the group's first quarter. Other deliverables can be worked on without waiting for these two documents to be final and polished. However, the design of APIs will depend on the environment to which they are tailored, and it will be necessary to have consensus on each of the primary aspects of this environment that these two documents define.
Most of the API deliverables in this charter already benefit from at least one and often several existing implementations. As such, once the preceding step is executed it is expected that the production of specifications building on strong implementation experience and existing documentation can proceed at the pace of five FPWDs per quarter (until Q2 of the second year). Each of these specifications is then expected to reach CR inside of three quarters, with transition to Recommendation status supported by the adaptation of tests from existing platforms to these specifications.
Deliverables | Q1 | Q2 | Q3-Q6 | Q7-Q8 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Note: The group will document significant changes from this initial schedule on the group home page. | ||||
Execution & Security Models | FPWD | LC, CR | ||
Alarm, Contacts, Messaging, Telephony, Raw Sockets | FPWD | LC | CR | |
Bluetooth, Browser, Calendar, Device Capabilites, Idle, File System, Media Storage, Network Interface, Secure Elements, System Settings | FPWD | LC, CR |
This Working Group’s specifications depend upon some specifications being developed by other Working Groups for example the Web Applications Working Group’s Web IDL specification and several of the Device APIs Working Group's specifications.
This Working Group expects to ask the following W3C Working Groups for reviews of deliverables in Last Call, and where appropriate to liaise on potential synergies:
The following is a tentative list of external bodies the Working Group should collaborate with:
To be successful, this Working Group is expected to have 10 or more active participants for its duration, and to have the participation of the industry leaders in fields relevant to the specifications it produces.
The Chairs and specification Editors are expected to contribute one to two days per week towards the Working Group. There is no minimum requirement for other participants.
For each specification the Working Group will name a Test Facilitator whose responsibility is to ensure that a Test Suite is made available.
Based on the input from the group participants, the Chairs may also decide to create task forces that allow more focused discussions for topics that require specific expertise.
This Working Group encourages questions and comments on its public mailing list, public-sysapps@w3.org, which is publicly archived.
Most of the technical work of the group is done through discussions on the public-sysapps@w3.org, the group’s public mailing list. Editors’ drafts and their editing history is available from a public W3C Web site. The group’s action and issue tracking data is also public, as are the participants-approved minutes from all teleconferences and meetings.
In general, the Working Group holds a weekly teleconference as needed, but additional teleconferences can be scheduled occasionally at the chairs' discretion if a specific topic seems to warrant synchronous discussion.
The group uses a Member-confidential mailing list for administrative purposes and, at the discretion of the Chairs and participants of the group, for Member-only discussions in special cases when a particular participant requests such a discussion.
Information about the group (for example, details about deliverables, issues, actions, status, participants) is available from the System Applications Working Group home page.
As explained in the W3C Process Document (section 3.3), this group will seek to make decisions when there is consensus and with due process. The expectation is that typically, an editor or other participant makes an initial proposal, which is then refined in discussion with members of the group and other reviewers, and consensus emerges with little formal voting being required. However, if a decision is necessary for timely progress, but consensus is not achieved after careful consideration of the range of views presented, the Chairs should put a question out for voting within the group (allowing for remote asynchronous participation—using, for example, email and/or web-based survey techniques) and record a decision, along with any objections. The matter should then be considered resolved unless and until new information becomes available.
Asynchronous decisions that are attained through the mailing list, possibly using a “Call for Consensus” process are preferred, but synchronous decisions made during a teleconference or a face-to-face meeting are valid provided that the topic they address was clearly outlined in a public agenda posted one week earlier so that non-participating parties have a chance to voice their views ahead of time.
This charter is written in accordance with Section 3.4, Votes of the W3C Process Document and includes no voting procedures beyond what the Process Document requires.
This Working Group operates under the W3C Patent Policy (5 February 2004 Version). To promote the widest adoption of Web standards, W3C seeks to issue Recommendations that can be implemented, according to this policy, on a Royalty-Free basis.
For more information about disclosure obligations for this group, please see the W3C Patent Policy Implementation.
This charter for this Working Group has been created according to section 6.2 of the Process Document. In the event of a conflict between this document or the provisions of any charter and the W3C Process, the W3C Process shall take precedence.
The draft charter reviewed by the W3C Membership is available.
The charter has been revised to fix links to the Tizen examples following a restructuring of their website.
Copyright© 2012 W3C® (MIT, ERCIM, Keio), All Rights Reserved.