Immersive Web Community Group -- 03 Sep 2019

<cwilso> scribenick: cwilso

<scribe> scribe: Chris Wilson

trevor: agenda items:

Discussion of TPAC session topics

trevor: TPAC is coming up - file requests

<atsushi> email on agenda items at TPAC: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-immersive-web/2019Sep/0001.html

ada: if you do "/ftf" in an issue, it will add an appropriate tag to request time on any issue at the tpac, across all the immersive-web org repos.

<ada> It is /facetoface

ada: "/facetoface"

change feature champions

trevor: John Pallett has asked to be relieved as feature champion on the repos he owns - we also have the ar-common repo and performance improvements repo, which are ownerless.
... wanted to have a quick discussion of feature championing.
... goals were originally to shepherd conversations along incubation.
... in this call, we don't necessarily need to sign up or pick feature champions, but I wanted to put it out there.

<trevorfsmith> Real World Geometry, DOM overlays, Privacy and Security, performance improvements, and ar-common.

trevor: If you're interested in championing, contact me.

mounir: why do we need co-champions for CG incubations? Do we need multiple organizations to support features/repos?

trevor: we usually don't even get to repo stage without multiple orgs being interested - we get past that in proposals/issues stage.

mounir: isn't that different from WICG, etc?

brandon: we've been using this process thus far and seems to be working

mounir: but so far the repos so far have one champion. Is this a new requirement that repos have co-champions?

<ada> scribenick: cwilso

trevor: no; we've been less stringent in the past, as we've been focused on VR complete

<inserted> scribenick: ada

chris: the wicg process is there is a bar to get a repo which is what we have here. THe bar is more than one org has to say this is interesting to explore. We odn't do it for single vendors.
... this is a gate to stop it being a dumping ground from single orgs
... I think that we didn't start out as need multiple champions need interest from multiple people.

<Zakim> johnpallett, you wanted to confirm that Piotr and Klaus can pick up the repos where I am feature owner while this is discussed

<cwilso> scribenick: cwilso

johnpallett: As feature owners in this space, Piotr and Klaus can step in on the RWG and privacy repos

trevor: yep. Taking opportunity to see if anyone else is interested

mounir: all those repos have cross-org support. Why do we need to add more process?

trevor: what process do you think we're adding?

mounir: needing multiple owners?

trevor: the co-champion isn't an editor role; it's not signing up to be editors
... the goal is to have multiple orgs who support an incubation.

<ada> scribenick: ada

chris: i think there are 2 interesting things the wicg doesn't have well defined out flow for specs. We started seeing somethings be worked on, on their own but not go anywhere.
... Our incubations need to go somewhere so there needs to be more buy in since there are more people that care about this specific area.
... One of the challenges is that we haven't clearly defined what working in an incubation means. We odn't have a single editor check anything in. In the wicg there are often single people working on a repo.

<cwilso> mounir: most browsers don't ship unless there is cross-browser interest.

Mounir: This seems to heavy wait, the media APIs were largely done by Google but then were given thumbs up from Mozilla.

trevorfsmith: THe champions aren't editors they are just in charge of making sure that feature is rolling forward and that the people who are interested stay interested.

Mounir: seems what the editor & chair should do

trevorfsmith: we have a dozen repos it's too much work the champions are to spread the work around.

<cwilso> scribenick: ada

trevorfsmith: your opinion is heard, may we move on?

<inserted> scribenick: cwilso

trevor: so, there are a couple of Googlers who are signing up for a few, a couple others expressed interest, I'll dig in. Contact me if you're interested.
... I'll have the conversation with the LT

possible common library release

trevor: looking at the layer up from XR, we have a need ot map low-level input into high level actions.
... so many different ways to do that, might be nice to have a standardized way to do teleport, etc.
... is there interest in a coordinated effort to do this?

<Zakim> klausw, you wanted to say unrelated, is someone keeping an eye on current flooding in Fukuoka and possible impact on TPAC?

Nell: in web-xr-input-profiles repo, I merged a pull request that made this a mono repo with multiple packages. I have another pr to go up, prob. Thursday that will split this even more.
... as well as separate packages for separate package description bits, etc.
... probably need to get a little further along to know where better generalization can happen
... probably not in the same repo, but we can discuss post-next-pr.

alex: one key benefit from the input profiles library being common, with a CDN, is that we can have forward compatibility.
... even if an app doesn't update in future, it might update the data for touchpad mapping, data models, etc. That might then be sufficient for an event mapping library on top to cover forward compat.

nell: was a big part of how this was designed, although due to all the flux it's hard to see. It should be easier to evaluate this once the next PR goes up.

<Leonard> sorry, I need to leave now.

trevor: AOB?

ada: just a reminder, please raise issues for tpac via "/facetoface" on github

<atsushi> +1 for sooner

bialpio: added an issue for the call - would like UAs to be able to not map input sources transiently?
... does it make sense to add an input source and then remove after the frame?

trevor: that's a WG topic
... we do have 15 minutes too

nell: not everyone who attends the WG call attends the CG call - we should discuss this on the WG.
... this is a pretty involved topic.

mounir: requires changes in the core spec, but will go in the hit-test spec.

brandon: there is an issue filed, so we can make progress there before next week.

- DRAFT -

Immersive Web Community Group

03 Sep 2019

Attendees

Contents

Discussion of TPAC session topics

change feature champions

possible common library release

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

Scribe.perl diagnostic output