Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
120 lines (86 loc) · 4.66 KB

WG-03-11.md

File metadata and controls

120 lines (86 loc) · 4.66 KB
Raw

WebAssembly logo

Agenda for the March 11 video call of WebAssembly's Working Group

  • Where: zoom.us
  • When: March 11, 2020 at 3pm-4pm UTC ( March 11, 2020 8am-9am PDT )
  • Location: on calendar invite to registered attendees
  • Contact:

Registration

If you are a Working Group member no registration is required.

If you are a Community Group member who would like to observe, please register here: https://goo.gl/forms/HD2kLCM0iSKk7AVl1

Logistics

The meeting will be on a zoom.us video conference. Installation is required, see the calendar invite.

Agenda items

  1. Opening, welcome and roll call
    1. Opening of the meeting
    2. Introduction of attendees
  2. Find volunteers for note taking (chair to volunteer).
  3. Adoption of the agenda
  4. Proposals and discussions
    1. Review of action items from prior meeting.
    2. POLL: standardize phase 4 proposals
      1. Non-trapping float to int
      2. Sign-extension operators
      3. Multi-value
    3. Discussion: new spec document design (Ben Smith + Eric Prud'hommeaux)
  5. Closure

Agenda items for future meetings

None.

Schedule constraints

None.

Meeting Notes

Introduction of attendees

  • Ben Smith
  • Ms2ger
  • Luke Wagner

POLL: standardize phase 4 proposals

  1. Non-trapping float to int

  2. Sign-extension operators

  3. Multi-value

We discussed how best to advance from phase 4 to phase 5. Because of the low attendance of this meeting, we decided to send out an email to the WG mailing list instead of polling the group.

We discussed that we should probably make a set of PRs for each proposal before sending the email out, so the group can see what they'd be agreeing to merge, and if there are any merge issues. It also requires us to linearize the set of proposals, which may be desirable.

AI(binji): Make a PR against the spec for each proposal.

AI(binji): Send out email to WG asking for approval to merge PRs

Discussion: new spec document design (Ben Smith + Eric Prud'hommeaux)

Ben presented to the group. The current core spec document is generated in a convoluted way (Restructured text, to single-page HTML, extracting MathJax and converting to Katex, python scripts, Bikeshed). This is not a maintainable solution. Ben Smith, Eric Prud'hommeaux, and Philippe Le Hégaret had a meeting to discuss improvements to this process a month ago. For the most part this process was done to ensure that the mathematics snippets in the document were renderable without JavaScript (which MathJax requires). However, since we can already produce a PDF from the spec document source, this would fit the requirement of having a non-JavaScript version of the document. We can then use the standard multi-page HTML w/ MathJax document as the main spec document.

This would require some changes to both documents to include the required W3C layout and front matter, but would be significantly less work than we are doing currently.

In general, the group seemed to think this was a good direction to go, though Ms2ger did mention that it was annoying that the document reflowed when the MathJax finally loaded. The group agreed. It also seems that perhaps the feature detection for MathJax is not quite right, since it doesn't detect that Firefox can render MathML, and says that MathML is not available if you try to choose it in the settings.

Ben also mentioned that we were considering moving to using the W3C's new living document process. It would be a better fit for WebAssembly in many ways, since it doesn't require going through the entire REC process. However, as far as we know, no other group has adopted this process yet, so there was some hesitation from the group. We discussed that perhaps if someone from the W3 was able to help us through the process, it might make it easier for us to make this decision.

AI(binji): Follow up on living document

Discussion: go offline for most meetings

Because of low attendance of this meeting, we discussed having more decisions made asynchronously over email. We weren't exactly sure the correct email address for the WG mailing list.

AI(binji): Find email for WG mailing list

Closure