This wiki is locked. Future workgroup activity and specification development must take place at our new wiki. For more information, see this blog post about the new governance model and this post about changes to the website.

Date: Wednesday, 9 March 2011

Time: 12:00 PM Eastern, 9:00 AM Pacific, 6:00 PM Zurich (contact SteveSpeicher if you'd like to participate)

Previous minutes: CmMeetings20110216

Agenda:

  • Reoccurring agenda items:
  • Main agenda items:
    • 2010 / CM 2.0 Retrospective - review action items from last meeting
      • Gather missing WG member feedback: AndreWeinand, others?
      • Summary:
        • Overall WG considers things worked well
        • Would like to see better alignment with something like reference impl / test suite
        • Better/more examples around how to adopt the spec
        • Continue to be scenario driven
      • Proposed actions:
        • Encourage contribution and development of RI & test suites from WG participants
        • Work on primer, tutorials, articles to help explain how to adopt the spec
        • Improve process for out-of-band reviews / decision making
        • Improve traceability and background of how specification conclusions were reached.
    • Goal is to finalize catalog of scenarios and prioritize for spec work
    • Progress on CmAttachments scenario elaboration and specification proposals
    • Identify specification needs/approach to support prioritized scenarios: CmScenarios
    • 3.0 Themes CmArchitecturalDirectionV3
  • Next meetings:
    • [Mar 16] - Elaborate on scenarios and identify specification needs

Minutes:

Attendees: SteveSpeicher, AndreWeinand, DaveJohnson, VijayAggarwal, SofiaYeung, BrianSteele, SamitMehta, RobertElves

Regrets: ScottBosworth

  • Welcome new member VijayAggarwal
  • Reoccurring agenda items:
  • Main agenda items:
    • 2010 / CM 2.0 Retrospective - review action items from last meeting
      • Gather missing WG member feedback: AndreWeinand, others?
      • AndreWeinand:
        • Need for best practices document / wiki page, and/or reference implementation: like HTTP content negotiation, what return codes to use, how to use cookies, If-Match header, how many redirects to handle, etc. HTTP spec is too big and vague, need general guidance. A forum for discussion.
        • Most often heard thing, how to get an OAuth connection
        • Some things missing: root services, project linking, .... some bootstrapping info, things outside of the scope to RTC.
        • Experience of development team, make mandatory or leave out: more useful if mandatory and minimal
        • Consistency, same spec for similar problems: resizing, how things are communicated back and forth
        • Plain RDF is good, very flexible and extensible
    • Identify specification needs/approach to support prioritized scenarios: CmScenarios
  • New ACTIONS:
    • SteveSpeicher / DaveJohnson - take feedback from Andre around implementation guidance wiki page, etc
    • ALL - be ready to prioritize and define top scenarios for 3.0
  • Next meetings:
    • Mar 16 - Prioritize scenarios for 3.0
    • Mar 30 - Elaborate on key scenarios for 3.0
Topic revision: r2 - 09 Mar 2011 - 18:58:07 - SteveSpeicher
 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Copyright � by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Contributions are governed by our Terms of Use
Ideas, requests, problems regarding this site? Send feedback