Meeting minutes
angel: Good morning
CG projects progress review
URI scheme
https://github.com/w3c/miniapp/issues/34
Dan_Zhou: Discussion of the feasibility of using HTTPS as MiniApp URI scheme happening in the above issuue
… @marcoscaceres and @ylafon commented on this issue
… Even if we use https, we still need a pre-judgment mechanism, which pre-judges whether a URI is a miniapp URI before the user agent initiates a network request
… @ylafon suggested the link element
… the link element only solves the issue of using it in HTML
… but not in JavaScript and other places
… any comment?
Lifecycle
<Angel_> 小程序生命周期explainer：https://github.com/w3c/miniapp/blob/gh-pages/specs/lifecycle/docs/explainer.md
https://w3c.github.io/miniapp/specs/lifecycle/
Qing_An: updated spec per feedback from Xiaomi
… initial draft complete
… wrote an informative explainer
… review needed
Widgets
https://w3c.github.io/miniapp/specs/widget-req/
@@: submitted a PR about trsanslation
… @@
Packaging
https://w3c.github.io/miniapp/specs/packaging/
tengyuan: baidu is also writing some text about packaging
… we think that the current scope is not big enough
… submitted a PR, and more will come
Manifest
https://w3c.github.io/miniapp/specs/manifest/
shouren: Fixed some remaining issues
… reviewed internally
… will write an explainer
… filed some issues on packaging
xiaoqian_: when writing explainers, I suggest that we explain what is the difference between us and PWA
Dan_Zhou: If we want to explain clearly, we need to explain the technical architecture of miniapps
… So do we need to write a high-level document to introduce the technical architecture of miniapps?
https://w3c.github.io/miniapp/white-paper/
xiaoqian_: We can extract some text from the white paper
angel: how much work? any template on the technical architecture document?
xiaoqian_: not yet. I'll look into it.
angel: timeline?
xiaoqian: about a week
Action: xiaoqian to get a template of MiniApp explainer
Next Steps for MiniApp standards in W3C
angel: REC-track or CG-only?
… our previous target was REC-track
… is there any change?
[silent]
xiaoqian_: what about implementation intent from the current miniapp vendors?
Angel_: Implementation is important, as is developer support, but it is not mandatory for every vendor before we push the work into a W3C WG
… we can start to prepare the charter of the working group, based on the current CG charter
xiaoqian_: I think we need more than two implementation intents from different vendors and after the TAG reviews and then prepare the working group
… if multiple vendors use the same engine, this is considered one implementation rather than two
Dan_Zhou: currently one vendor leads one specification, and other vendors are not sufficiently involved
… I have no doubt about the goal of setting up a working group, but I don’t know if we will encounter push-back from the TAG.
xiaoqian_: in terms of process, TAG can not hinder the establishment of the working group
… but consensus from the TAG is still needed
xueyuan: advance notice would be helpful to collect member comments
Angel_: we can review the current open issues in GitHub in April
… and submit the TAG view of the remaining proposals
… send advance notice for the WG charter
… the goal is to have a F2F in TPAC (if possible), and set up a working group in October
… any comment?
@@: we are still trying to figure out which part of the widgets should be standardised
… Before June, the parts related to lifecycle in widgets will be written into the lifecycle spec
Angel_: hope everyone looks into and replies to the GitHub issues
… teleconferences are not enough
https://github.com/w3c/miniapp/issues
xiaoqian_: timeline of a11y document?
Angel_: initial framework of the document within a month
… won't be on REC-track
… accessibility of mini apps is important, and it is not good enough
… so we need to write a best practice or requirements document
… we can write a group note in the CG and future WG
xiaoqian_: For security and privacy review, we need to clearly write down our thoughts on security and privacy
https://www.w3.org/TR/security-privacy-questionnaire/
xiaoqian: if we have time, we can translate the Security and Privacy Questionnaire into Chinese
Switch to Zoom for later CG Calls
Angel_: Today is our first meeting with Zoom. Any issue?
… objection on switching to Zoom for later CG calls?
[silent]
AOB
angel: next meeting, May 7 or May 14?
[silent]
angel: let's meet on May 14, 9:00 AM Beijing time
xiaoqian_: for the English-only documents, do we need to translate them into Chinese?
shouren: +1
xiaoqian_: lifecycle is currently English-only
shouren: and packaging
Angel_: We will write a Chinese version for the lifecycle spec
xiaoqian: please look into the GitHub issues, especially the old issues
Angel: thanks all!
[adjourned]