New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

WebPlatform Web Components F2F 2018 #713

Closed
TakayoshiKochi opened this Issue Nov 22, 2017 · 69 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
@TakayoshiKochi
Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Nov 22, 2017

At TPAC, we agreed to have another F2F around February 2018, at somewhere not in the US, so everyone can join. Let's plan the next F2F! (last update Feb. 20, 2017)

Date: Mar. 5-6 (Mon-Tue), 2018 10am - 6pm
Venue: Google Tokyo Office (Roppongi, Tokyo, Japan)
For detailed logistics see w3c's meetings page.

@annevk

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@annevk

annevk Nov 22, 2017

Member

Some thoughts:

  • Multiple days seems good.
  • Let's decide well in advance which days to focus on existing issues versus new functionality. That makes it easier to plan for folks with less time/budget.
  • Let's make sure to extend invitations to React, Ember, Vue.js, ? well in advance as well. Representation from Angular has historically not been a problem, but to succeed we'll need more folks to weigh in.
  • If we manage to get the various frameworks to attend I'd like us to have some unconference sessions for problems with the web platform in general, not restricted to web components.
Member

annevk commented Nov 22, 2017

Some thoughts:

  • Multiple days seems good.
  • Let's decide well in advance which days to focus on existing issues versus new functionality. That makes it easier to plan for folks with less time/budget.
  • Let's make sure to extend invitations to React, Ember, Vue.js, ? well in advance as well. Representation from Angular has historically not been a problem, but to succeed we'll need more folks to weigh in.
  • If we manage to get the various frameworks to attend I'd like us to have some unconference sessions for problems with the web platform in general, not restricted to web components.
@annevk

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@annevk

annevk Nov 23, 2017

Member

Since email addresses are hard to come by: @yyx990803 @wycats @tomdale @sophiebits @gaearon @sebmarkbage would you all (or someone you know who can represent the JavaScript framework you work on) be interested in meeting up in Toronto next year February primarily to discuss extensions to the DOM and HTML in browser implementations ("Web Components"), but not necessarily limited to that.

Our rough plan is to have a day to go through existing issues, and one or more days to discuss new ideas, such as HTML modules and HTML Template Instantiation, and learn from you all what the pain points are with the platform.

Member

annevk commented Nov 23, 2017

Since email addresses are hard to come by: @yyx990803 @wycats @tomdale @sophiebits @gaearon @sebmarkbage would you all (or someone you know who can represent the JavaScript framework you work on) be interested in meeting up in Toronto next year February primarily to discuss extensions to the DOM and HTML in browser implementations ("Web Components"), but not necessarily limited to that.

Our rough plan is to have a day to go through existing issues, and one or more days to discuss new ideas, such as HTML modules and HTML Template Instantiation, and learn from you all what the pain points are with the platform.

@TakayoshiKochi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TakayoshiKochi

TakayoshiKochi Nov 27, 2017

Member

@justinfagnani @azakus @kevinpschaaf from the Polymer team (they were at TPAC) may also be interested in this.

Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Nov 27, 2017

@justinfagnani @azakus @kevinpschaaf from the Polymer team (they were at TPAC) may also be interested in this.

@yyx990803

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@yyx990803

yyx990803 Nov 27, 2017

For the record, I am particularly interested in HTML modules and HTML Template Instantiation and would be willing to attend the days that are focusing on these.

yyx990803 commented Nov 27, 2017

For the record, I am particularly interested in HTML modules and HTML Template Instantiation and would be willing to attend the days that are focusing on these.

@tomalec

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tomalec

tomalec Nov 28, 2017

Contributor

Could we bring up customized built-ins/extending native elements/custom elements with different parsing contexts to the agenda?

I would say, >430 comments, hundreds of thumbs-ups, many participants in the single issue and even more if we count related issues, proves the need for it.

Contributor

tomalec commented Nov 28, 2017

Could we bring up customized built-ins/extending native elements/custom elements with different parsing contexts to the agenda?

I would say, >430 comments, hundreds of thumbs-ups, many participants in the single issue and even more if we count related issues, proves the need for it.

@annevk

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@annevk

annevk Nov 29, 2017

Member

Pointer? Is there a concrete proposal with some implementer support?

Member

annevk commented Nov 29, 2017

Pointer? Is there a concrete proposal with some implementer support?

@domenic

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@domenic

domenic Nov 29, 2017

Contributor

My understanding is that customized built-ins, as specced, have 3/4 implementer support. So they may not be a fruitful topic for discussion; instead web developers can bring up their concerns with their Apple representatives directly at another venue (e.g. in said centithread).

Contributor

domenic commented Nov 29, 2017

My understanding is that customized built-ins, as specced, have 3/4 implementer support. So they may not be a fruitful topic for discussion; instead web developers can bring up their concerns with their Apple representatives directly at another venue (e.g. in said centithread).

@tomdale

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tomdale

tomdale Dec 7, 2017

I would definitely be interested in attending. My email address, if it makes things easier: tom@tomdale.net.

tomdale commented Dec 7, 2017

I would definitely be interested in attending. My email address, if it makes things easier: tom@tomdale.net.

@TakayoshiKochi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TakayoshiKochi

TakayoshiKochi Dec 8, 2017

Member

Updated the agenda in OP.
Tentatively set the schedule for 3 days - which means it starts on Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday
(to Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday, respectively).
Also I'd like to ping @travisleithead and @rniwa if anyone from MS and Apple can join.

Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Dec 8, 2017

Updated the agenda in OP.
Tentatively set the schedule for 3 days - which means it starts on Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday
(to Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday, respectively).
Also I'd like to ping @travisleithead and @rniwa if anyone from MS and Apple can join.

@rniwa

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rniwa

rniwa Dec 8, 2017

Contributor

Do we really need three days? I don't think I can quite afford to be there for three days.

Contributor

rniwa commented Dec 8, 2017

Do we really need three days? I don't think I can quite afford to be there for three days.

@hober

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@hober

hober Dec 8, 2017

Member

Two days sounds good. I think 2/19–20 work for me.

Member

hober commented Dec 8, 2017

Two days sounds good. I think 2/19–20 work for me.

@JanMiksovsky

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@JanMiksovsky

JanMiksovsky Dec 9, 2017

2/19/2018 is President's Day, a federal holiday in the U.S. Many people have that day off, and some people stretch the holiday weekend by a day or so.

As it turns out, in the corner of the country where I live (Seattle), many schools have that entire week off as a mid-winter break. My children happen to attend two such schools, so while I'd really like to make it to this meeting, I couldn't attend a meeting held the week of 2/19.

Obviously any given time will be inconvenient for some people, so the group should decide what works well for a quorum of people. But if this could be deferred to the following week or early March, that'd help people taking time off around that national holiday.

JanMiksovsky commented Dec 9, 2017

2/19/2018 is President's Day, a federal holiday in the U.S. Many people have that day off, and some people stretch the holiday weekend by a day or so.

As it turns out, in the corner of the country where I live (Seattle), many schools have that entire week off as a mid-winter break. My children happen to attend two such schools, so while I'd really like to make it to this meeting, I couldn't attend a meeting held the week of 2/19.

Obviously any given time will be inconvenient for some people, so the group should decide what works well for a quorum of people. But if this could be deferred to the following week or early March, that'd help people taking time off around that national holiday.

@annevk

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@annevk

annevk Dec 9, 2017

Member

@rniwa @hober my idea was that we'd have two structured days focused around existing issues and new proposals, and one day that's a bit more exploratory. If we stick to that then I think those that want to take less time can figure out for themselves which days they're interested in. And hopefully nobody falls in the category of wanting to skip new proposals...

FWIW, I can do a week later (26 - 28, 27 - 1, or 28 - 2) in theory.

Member

annevk commented Dec 9, 2017

@rniwa @hober my idea was that we'd have two structured days focused around existing issues and new proposals, and one day that's a bit more exploratory. If we stick to that then I think those that want to take less time can figure out for themselves which days they're interested in. And hopefully nobody falls in the category of wanting to skip new proposals...

FWIW, I can do a week later (26 - 28, 27 - 1, or 28 - 2) in theory.

@rniwa

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rniwa

rniwa Dec 9, 2017

Contributor

If it's on the week of Feb 26th, then I can't do Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday.

Contributor

rniwa commented Dec 9, 2017

If it's on the week of Feb 26th, then I can't do Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday.

@annevk

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@annevk

annevk Dec 9, 2017

Member

Here's a doodle: https://doodle.com/poll/nry9ut6n3g7x2cge. I suggest we pick based on the result of that doodle at the end of next week (so please please fill it in when you read this message) so everyone has plenty of time to make arrangements.

Member

annevk commented Dec 9, 2017

Here's a doodle: https://doodle.com/poll/nry9ut6n3g7x2cge. I suggest we pick based on the result of that doodle at the end of next week (so please please fill it in when you read this message) so everyone has plenty of time to make arrangements.

@TakayoshiKochi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TakayoshiKochi

TakayoshiKochi Dec 11, 2017

Member

Thanks @annevk for setting up the doodle!
I'm okay for any of these 3 weeks, but considering many are from the US and the holiday, the week of Feb. 19 was not a good option, and considering @rniwa is a must for the meeting, Mar. 1-2 or
the week of Mar.5 would currently looks the stronger candidate.

If we were to squeeze the schedule into 2 days, maybe we can prepare for going through the existing bugs beforehand, and shorten what need to be done in F2F, then we can still have time for discussing new stuff? E.g. On each day if we have 4 slots (1.5-2hrs?), how about doing like this?

1st day

  • contentious bugs resolution
  • template instantiation
  • template processing
  • buffer / unconf 1

2nd day

  • HTML modules
  • HTML modules (cont.)
  • unconf 2
  • buffer / remaining stuff

We need to have pre-meeting prep for identifying really contentious parts, and bring concrete proposals or use cases beforehand, but it would make the meeting more productive, I believe.

Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Dec 11, 2017

Thanks @annevk for setting up the doodle!
I'm okay for any of these 3 weeks, but considering many are from the US and the holiday, the week of Feb. 19 was not a good option, and considering @rniwa is a must for the meeting, Mar. 1-2 or
the week of Mar.5 would currently looks the stronger candidate.

If we were to squeeze the schedule into 2 days, maybe we can prepare for going through the existing bugs beforehand, and shorten what need to be done in F2F, then we can still have time for discussing new stuff? E.g. On each day if we have 4 slots (1.5-2hrs?), how about doing like this?

1st day

  • contentious bugs resolution
  • template instantiation
  • template processing
  • buffer / unconf 1

2nd day

  • HTML modules
  • HTML modules (cont.)
  • unconf 2
  • buffer / remaining stuff

We need to have pre-meeting prep for identifying really contentious parts, and bring concrete proposals or use cases beforehand, but it would make the meeting more productive, I believe.

@rniwa

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rniwa

rniwa Dec 12, 2017

Contributor

Yeah, something like for two days sounds good. I also like the first week of March.

Contributor

rniwa commented Dec 12, 2017

Yeah, something like for two days sounds good. I also like the first week of March.

@domenic

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@domenic

domenic Dec 12, 2017

Contributor

I've filled out the Doodle and have a conflicting event on the 1st and 2nd. First week of March is sounding more promising.

I would prefer to avoid meetings on Mondays or Fridays since they would then require traveling on a weekend.

Contributor

domenic commented Dec 12, 2017

I've filled out the Doodle and have a conflicting event on the 1st and 2nd. First week of March is sounding more promising.

I would prefer to avoid meetings on Mondays or Fridays since they would then require traveling on a weekend.

@rniwa

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rniwa

rniwa Dec 12, 2017

Contributor

I'd prefer not having this meeting in the middle of a week since I have way too many other commitments, and flying during a week day would mean that I'd have to work over weekends to compensate for it.

Contributor

rniwa commented Dec 12, 2017

I'd prefer not having this meeting in the middle of a week since I have way too many other commitments, and flying during a week day would mean that I'd have to work over weekends to compensate for it.

@TakayoshiKochi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TakayoshiKochi

TakayoshiKochi Dec 13, 2017

Member

Thanks for putting your dates on doodle.
As @annevk already said, let's close this at the end of this week (Sat. Dec. 16) to decide the date.
Note that you don't have to put your name/date if you are flexible, putting your name is not mandatory for joining the meeting.

So far people are good for 2 days conf, but I see some schedule conflict.
I'd try best to accommodate all preferences, so please speak up!

Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Dec 13, 2017

Thanks for putting your dates on doodle.
As @annevk already said, let's close this at the end of this week (Sat. Dec. 16) to decide the date.
Note that you don't have to put your name/date if you are flexible, putting your name is not mandatory for joining the meeting.

So far people are good for 2 days conf, but I see some schedule conflict.
I'd try best to accommodate all preferences, so please speak up!

@justinfagnani

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@justinfagnani

justinfagnani Dec 13, 2017

I think first week of March works for me too, I'm checking.

I'd like to throw scoped custom element registrations on the agenda, if possible: #716

@TakayoshiKochi is there a difference between "template instantiation" and "template processing"? By "template processing" do you mean just focusing on the built-in template processor?

justinfagnani commented Dec 13, 2017

I think first week of March works for me too, I'm checking.

I'd like to throw scoped custom element registrations on the agenda, if possible: #716

@TakayoshiKochi is there a difference between "template instantiation" and "template processing"? By "template processing" do you mean just focusing on the built-in template processor?

@TakayoshiKochi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TakayoshiKochi

TakayoshiKochi Dec 13, 2017

Member

is there a difference between "template instantiation" and "template processing"? By "template processing" do you mean just focusing on the built-in template processor?

No, I just split the HTML Template Instantiation into 2 parts somewhat arbitrarily, guessing that it would need time for 2 slots.

Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Dec 13, 2017

is there a difference between "template instantiation" and "template processing"? By "template processing" do you mean just focusing on the built-in template processor?

No, I just split the HTML Template Instantiation into 2 parts somewhat arbitrarily, guessing that it would need time for 2 slots.

@travisleithead

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@travisleithead

travisleithead Dec 13, 2017

Member

Also I'd like to ping @travisleithead and @rniwa if anyone from MS and Apple can join.

We'll try to have someone from Microsoft be there regardless of the dates--either myself or (hopefully) one or two of my colleagues; haven't figured that out just yet...

Member

travisleithead commented Dec 13, 2017

Also I'd like to ping @travisleithead and @rniwa if anyone from MS and Apple can join.

We'll try to have someone from Microsoft be there regardless of the dates--either myself or (hopefully) one or two of my colleagues; haven't figured that out just yet...

@robwormald

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@robwormald

robwormald Dec 14, 2017

I’ll attend from the Angular team, and am flexible on dates.

robwormald commented Dec 14, 2017

I’ll attend from the Angular team, and am flexible on dates.

@developit

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@developit

developit Dec 14, 2017

I'll be happy to attend for Preact!

developit commented Dec 14, 2017

I'll be happy to attend for Preact!

@rniwa

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rniwa

rniwa Dec 15, 2017

Contributor

By the way, while Toronto is a lovely city there might be a snow storm & long delays for flights in February & March so I would throw in Tokyo & London as possible alternatives (assuming Google / Mozilla's respective offices can accommodate us) although that might make traveling harder for some U.S.-based individuals.

Contributor

rniwa commented Dec 15, 2017

By the way, while Toronto is a lovely city there might be a snow storm & long delays for flights in February & March so I would throw in Tokyo & London as possible alternatives (assuming Google / Mozilla's respective offices can accommodate us) although that might make traveling harder for some U.S.-based individuals.

@sophiebits

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@sophiebits

sophiebits Dec 15, 2017

Closing the loop from the React side: I don't think we'll make it to this unless there's something specific you'd like input on – we're not actively working on anything in this space. Thanks for thinking of us!

sophiebits commented Dec 15, 2017

Closing the loop from the React side: I don't think we'll make it to this unless there's something specific you'd like input on – we're not actively working on anything in this space. Thanks for thinking of us!

@TakayoshiKochi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TakayoshiKochi

TakayoshiKochi Dec 15, 2017

Member

I have never been to Toronto so I have no idea how terrible to be there at the season... but I believe Ryosuke for his experience. @annevk @smaug---- do you have any idea where it would be in Europe?
If it will be in Tokyo, I'm happy to work on securing meeting rooms at Google Tokyo.
Let's decide on location asap for everyone to schedule.

Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Dec 15, 2017

I have never been to Toronto so I have no idea how terrible to be there at the season... but I believe Ryosuke for his experience. @annevk @smaug---- do you have any idea where it would be in Europe?
If it will be in Tokyo, I'm happy to work on securing meeting rooms at Google Tokyo.
Let's decide on location asap for everyone to schedule.

@smaug----

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@smaug----

smaug---- Dec 15, 2017

Mozilla's office in London may not have good meeting space. The office in Berlin would be better.

smaug---- commented Dec 15, 2017

Mozilla's office in London may not have good meeting space. The office in Berlin would be better.

@prushforth

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@prushforth

prushforth Dec 15, 2017

Could we bring up customized built-ins/extending native elements/custom elements with different parsing contexts to the agenda?

I second this. I would like to add that there is a general need for the ability to create 'speculative polyfills' for unknown elements, which autonomous elements don't support. Example <foo is="new-foo">

I would say, >430 comments, hundreds of thumbs-ups, many participants in the single issue and even more if we count related issues, proves the need for it.

+1

My understanding is that customized built-ins, as specced, have 3/4 implementer support. So they may not be a fruitful topic for discussion; instead web developers can bring up their concerns with their Apple representatives directly at another venue (e.g. in said centithread).

Is Chrome waiting on Safari to implement this? If so they will be waiting a long time, I think. Better to follow Mozilla's example and implement based on about as good a consensus as you are likely to get.
Because the webcomponents speculative polyfill for built-ins are blocked on Chrome, apparently, so Web developers can't even vote with their feet.

At the very least, I think there's something to discuss. My .02 cents.

prushforth commented Dec 15, 2017

Could we bring up customized built-ins/extending native elements/custom elements with different parsing contexts to the agenda?

I second this. I would like to add that there is a general need for the ability to create 'speculative polyfills' for unknown elements, which autonomous elements don't support. Example <foo is="new-foo">

I would say, >430 comments, hundreds of thumbs-ups, many participants in the single issue and even more if we count related issues, proves the need for it.

+1

My understanding is that customized built-ins, as specced, have 3/4 implementer support. So they may not be a fruitful topic for discussion; instead web developers can bring up their concerns with their Apple representatives directly at another venue (e.g. in said centithread).

Is Chrome waiting on Safari to implement this? If so they will be waiting a long time, I think. Better to follow Mozilla's example and implement based on about as good a consensus as you are likely to get.
Because the webcomponents speculative polyfill for built-ins are blocked on Chrome, apparently, so Web developers can't even vote with their feet.

At the very least, I think there's something to discuss. My .02 cents.

@TakayoshiKochi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TakayoshiKochi

TakayoshiKochi Dec 20, 2017

Member

I'll close the vote tomorrow night (~24hrs away) and make a decision.
It looks like @rniwa has preference to Toronto (against Tokyo), but assuming he's okay if it's Mon-Tue (although I sympathize the tough schedule) and if the reactions indicate more people comfortable with Tokyo, we'd go with Tokyo.

Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Dec 20, 2017

I'll close the vote tomorrow night (~24hrs away) and make a decision.
It looks like @rniwa has preference to Toronto (against Tokyo), but assuming he's okay if it's Mon-Tue (although I sympathize the tough schedule) and if the reactions indicate more people comfortable with Tokyo, we'd go with Tokyo.

@smaug----

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@smaug----

smaug---- Dec 20, 2017

Tokyo on Mon-Tue is fine to me.

But I did tentatively reserve the large meeting space at Mozilla's Toronto office, Tue-Wed (Mar. 6-7)

smaug---- commented Dec 20, 2017

Tokyo on Mon-Tue is fine to me.

But I did tentatively reserve the large meeting space at Mozilla's Toronto office, Tue-Wed (Mar. 6-7)

@caridy

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@caridy

caridy Dec 20, 2017

Paris, Tue-Wed (Mar. 6-7) - We have booked a big room as a backup plan!

caridy commented Dec 20, 2017

Paris, Tue-Wed (Mar. 6-7) - We have booked a big room as a backup plan!

@binoculars

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@binoculars

binoculars Dec 20, 2017

I'm really happy to see that there is formal discussion around template instantiation and html modules. Thank you all for pushing these forward!

binoculars commented Dec 20, 2017

I'm really happy to see that there is formal discussion around template instantiation and html modules. Thank you all for pushing these forward!

@rniwa

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rniwa

rniwa Dec 20, 2017

Contributor

Yeah, I gave my preference to Toronto but Mon-Tue in Tokyo is fine for me.

Contributor

rniwa commented Dec 20, 2017

Yeah, I gave my preference to Toronto but Mon-Tue in Tokyo is fine for me.

@TakayoshiKochi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TakayoshiKochi

TakayoshiKochi Dec 21, 2017

Member

Thanks all, let's fix the place and date: Tokyo, Mon-Tue (Mar. 5-6)!

Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Dec 21, 2017

Thanks all, let's fix the place and date: Tokyo, Mon-Tue (Mar. 5-6)!

@chaals

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@chaals

chaals Jan 31, 2018

Contributor

Meeting page is now up.

Please add yourself by PR if you are attending / have agenda requests. We will scrape this issue for the agenda too.

Contributor

chaals commented Jan 31, 2018

Meeting page is now up.

Please add yourself by PR if you are attending / have agenda requests. We will scrape this issue for the agenda too.

@GarrettS

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@GarrettS

GarrettS Jan 31, 2018

[CMN: The content of this was inappropriate - an unprofessional ad hominem attack on an individual - and has been deleted]

GarrettS commented Jan 31, 2018

[CMN: The content of this was inappropriate - an unprofessional ad hominem attack on an individual - and has been deleted]

@rniwa

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rniwa

rniwa Jan 31, 2018

Contributor

In the future, please be reminded of Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct.

I understand your sentiment but that's not a productive feedback. If you have specific concerns or complaints about web components, please file a new issue.

Contributor

rniwa commented Jan 31, 2018

In the future, please be reminded of Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct.

I understand your sentiment but that's not a productive feedback. If you have specific concerns or complaints about web components, please file a new issue.

@treshugart

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@treshugart

treshugart Feb 6, 2018

Would it be worth discussing declarative shadow DOM on one of the days?

treshugart commented Feb 6, 2018

Would it be worth discussing declarative shadow DOM on one of the days?

@tomalec

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tomalec

tomalec Feb 6, 2018

Contributor

As Anne asked for a proposal. I'll publish my strawman proposal today, maybe someone would be interested in reviewing it.

Contributor

tomalec commented Feb 6, 2018

As Anne asked for a proposal. I'll publish my strawman proposal today, maybe someone would be interested in reviewing it.

@tomalec

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tomalec

tomalec Feb 6, 2018

Contributor

My slightly more structured proposal for Declarative Shadow DOM is at
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/Declarative-Shadow-DOM.md (#731)

Contributor

tomalec commented Feb 6, 2018

My slightly more structured proposal for Declarative Shadow DOM is at
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/Declarative-Shadow-DOM.md (#731)

@treshugart

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@treshugart

treshugart Feb 8, 2018

Nice one, @tomalec. I raised an issue with some of my ideas awhile back in whatwg/dom#531. I've also published some similar musings in https://github.com/treshugart/react-shade which uses React portals to implement a declarative API. I'd be interested in using your proposal as a base to discuss related ideas.

treshugart commented Feb 8, 2018

Nice one, @tomalec. I raised an issue with some of my ideas awhile back in whatwg/dom#531. I've also published some similar musings in https://github.com/treshugart/react-shade which uses React portals to implement a declarative API. I'd be interested in using your proposal as a base to discuss related ideas.

@treshugart

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@treshugart

treshugart Feb 15, 2018

I'll be attending on behalf of SkateJS / Atlassian.

treshugart commented Feb 15, 2018

I'll be attending on behalf of SkateJS / Atlassian.

@travisleithead

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@travisleithead

travisleithead Feb 16, 2018

Member

Per my previous note:

We'll try to have someone from Microsoft be there regardless of the dates--either myself or (hopefully) one or two of my colleagues; haven't figured that out just yet...

Looks like @patrickkettner will be able to be there in person. Thanks Patrick!

Member

travisleithead commented Feb 16, 2018

Per my previous note:

We'll try to have someone from Microsoft be there regardless of the dates--either myself or (hopefully) one or two of my colleagues; haven't figured that out just yet...

Looks like @patrickkettner will be able to be there in person. Thanks Patrick!

@annevk

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@annevk

annevk Feb 19, 2018

Member

I think we should do some in-person triaging for these issues:

Reducing the number of these issues by stating implementer interest or agreement early is welcome. Then we can use the face-to-face time for other things. (I've mostly removed the v2 label except for things we have clear agreement on. That makes it clearer where the various issues are at in the process.)

Another thing we should discuss is how to address the remaining v1 and upstream issues. In particular there's quite a lot of UI/focus/editing stuff that hasn't really been getting attention while being somewhat essential for the success of shadow trees.

Member

annevk commented Feb 19, 2018

I think we should do some in-person triaging for these issues:

Reducing the number of these issues by stating implementer interest or agreement early is welcome. Then we can use the face-to-face time for other things. (I've mostly removed the v2 label except for things we have clear agreement on. That makes it clearer where the various issues are at in the process.)

Another thing we should discuss is how to address the remaining v1 and upstream issues. In particular there's quite a lot of UI/focus/editing stuff that hasn't really been getting attention while being somewhat essential for the success of shadow trees.

@rniwa

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rniwa

rniwa Feb 20, 2018

Contributor

I just reviewed & commented on most issues.

Contributor

rniwa commented Feb 20, 2018

I just reviewed & commented on most issues.

tomalec added a commit to tomalec/WebPlatformWG that referenced this issue Feb 21, 2018

tomalec added a commit to tomalec/WebPlatformWG that referenced this issue Feb 21, 2018

Add declarative Shadow DOM to the Agenda
of Web Components F2F 2018 w3c/webcomponents#713
As the most commented out of whatwg/dom"needs implementer interest" whatwg/dom/issues?q=is%3Aopen+label%3A%22needs+implementer+interest%22+sort%3Acomments-desc

tomalec added a commit to tomalec/WebPlatformWG that referenced this issue Feb 21, 2018

@TakayoshiKochi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TakayoshiKochi

TakayoshiKochi Feb 26, 2018

Member

The meeting is only 1 week away!

If you attend the meeting but have not put your name on w3c's minutes page, please register yourself by the end of Tuesday this week (Feb. 27) (at your timezone).

We (host at Google Tokyo office) are collecting the list for distributing security badges for the building and the office for the guests, and we need your names for it.

If you have any last minute change on your travel after that, don't worry, please let me (kochi@google.com) know. We have some room for additional people.

Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Feb 26, 2018

The meeting is only 1 week away!

If you attend the meeting but have not put your name on w3c's minutes page, please register yourself by the end of Tuesday this week (Feb. 27) (at your timezone).

We (host at Google Tokyo office) are collecting the list for distributing security badges for the building and the office for the guests, and we need your names for it.

If you have any last minute change on your travel after that, don't worry, please let me (kochi@google.com) know. We have some room for additional people.

@annevk

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@annevk

annevk Feb 26, 2018

Member

@TakayoshiKochi it doesn't seem like https://github.com/w3c/WebPlatformWG/blob/gh-pages/meetings/18-03-Web-components.md#agenda aligns with #713 (comment). I sure hope we keep the unconference aspects to some extent. We could potentially replace it by just asking everyone at the start of the meeting what they think requires discussion most urgently and adjust the agenda based on that. In general we want to keep it pretty flexible I think.

Member

annevk commented Feb 26, 2018

@TakayoshiKochi it doesn't seem like https://github.com/w3c/WebPlatformWG/blob/gh-pages/meetings/18-03-Web-components.md#agenda aligns with #713 (comment). I sure hope we keep the unconference aspects to some extent. We could potentially replace it by just asking everyone at the start of the meeting what they think requires discussion most urgently and adjust the agenda based on that. In general we want to keep it pretty flexible I think.

@TakayoshiKochi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TakayoshiKochi

TakayoshiKochi Feb 26, 2018

Member

@annevk yeah, will update it (I am thinking of this thread is the canonical discussion for the agenda).

Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Feb 26, 2018

@annevk yeah, will update it (I am thinking of this thread is the canonical discussion for the agenda).

@diervo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@diervo

diervo Mar 2, 2018

Would it be possible have a slot to talk about the progress made on the AOM proposal?

diervo commented Mar 2, 2018

Would it be possible have a slot to talk about the progress made on the AOM proposal?

@annevk

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@annevk

annevk Mar 2, 2018

Member

@diervo yeah, we should definitely discuss accessibility. I think the best thing as I said in an earlier comment is that we each state briefly at the beginning what we want to discuss and make up the agenda from that. And also do some (quick) issue triage together to cover the various proposals that have been made over the years.

Member

annevk commented Mar 2, 2018

@diervo yeah, we should definitely discuss accessibility. I think the best thing as I said in an earlier comment is that we each state briefly at the beginning what we want to discuss and make up the agenda from that. And also do some (quick) issue triage together to cover the various proposals that have been made over the years.

@TakayoshiKochi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TakayoshiKochi

TakayoshiKochi Mar 7, 2018

Member

Thanks all for the productive discussions!

The actual agenda used was:
https://public.etherpad-mozilla.org/p/web_components_agenda

@chaals would you post the meeting minutes at https://github.com/w3c/WebPlatformWG/blob/gh-pages/Meetings.md ?

Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Mar 7, 2018

Thanks all for the productive discussions!

The actual agenda used was:
https://public.etherpad-mozilla.org/p/web_components_agenda

@chaals would you post the meeting minutes at https://github.com/w3c/WebPlatformWG/blob/gh-pages/Meetings.md ?

@TakayoshiKochi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TakayoshiKochi

TakayoshiKochi Mar 9, 2018

Member

The minutes are posted, thanks @chaals and @diervo !

Monday: https://www.w3.org/2018/03/05-webplat-minutes.html
Tuesday: https://www.w3.org/2018/03/06-webplat-minutes.html

(edit: the second link was wrong, fixed now)

Member

TakayoshiKochi commented Mar 9, 2018

The minutes are posted, thanks @chaals and @diervo !

Monday: https://www.w3.org/2018/03/05-webplat-minutes.html
Tuesday: https://www.w3.org/2018/03/06-webplat-minutes.html

(edit: the second link was wrong, fixed now)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment