[OpenAjaxSecurity] [OpenAjaxInterop] Minutes Interoperability WG phone call 2007-09-19
weingram at tibco.com
Thu Sep 20 01:26:11 PDT 2007
I was also there.
From: interop-bounces at openajax.org
[mailto:interop-bounces at openajax.org] On Behalf Of Jon Ferraiolo
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 6:36 PM
To: interop at openajax.org; security at openajax.org;
communicationshub at openajax.org
Subject: [OpenAjaxInterop] Minutes Interoperability WG phone
We had a big turnout today. As a result, I might have not
recorded when some of you joined the call. If you attended the phone
call and your name is not listed, please fix the wiki page that contains
OpenAjax Alliance Interoperability Committee meeting minutes
* Gideon Lee <glee(at)openspot.com>
* Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai(at)us.ibm.com>
* Ted Thibodeau <tthibodeau(at)openlinksw.com>
* Coach Wei <coach(at)nexaweb.com>
* Bertrand Le Roy <bleroy (at) microsoft.com>
* David Boloker <boloker(at)us.ibm.com>
* Howard Weingram <weingram (at)tibco.com>
* Larry Koved <koved(at)us.ibm.com>
* Naohiko Uramoto <uramoto(at)jp.ibm.com>
* Todd Kaplinger <todkap(at)us.ibm.com>
* Frederik De Keukelaere <EB41704(at)jp.ibm.com>
* Michael Steiner <msteiner(at)us.ibm.com>
* Sumeer Bhola <sbhola(at)us.ibm.com>
* Suresh N. Chari <schari(at)us.ibm.com>
* Haik Sahakian <Haik.Sahakian(at)fmr.com>
* Sachiko Yoshihama <sachikoy(at)jp.ibm.com>
* Mike Pittaro <mikeyp(at)snaplogic.org>
<http://www.openajax.org/member/wiki/InteropFest_1.0> reminder - time
is running out
* Next week's face-to-face meeting
* Meeting home page:
* OpenAjax Registry
* Jon has built some tools and
fleshed out the Registry section of the Web site
* Main Registry folder:
* Approved Registry:
* HTML for Registry:
* Search globals template:
* Search globals on OpenAjax Hub:
* Other Registry URLs:
* OpenAjax Hub 1.1
* Target feature set
* Current status
* Plans in the coming months
* OpenAjax Hub 1.0 Issue 17
* Allow arbitrary text at end of
OpenAjax.hub.registerLibrary() version strings?
Topic: Introductory comments
Jon: We have an exceptionally high turnout today because we will
be discussion Hub 1.1 with people from InteropWG, now defunct CommHub TF
and Security TF. CommHub TF has now merged with InteropWG. Therefore,
the Security TF people are special guests today.
Jon: Reminder - press release next week. quotes need to be in by
Bertrand: MS will be participating
Jon: Do you want to be listed in the press release?
Jon: Provide a quote?
Bertrand: Probably not.
Jon: I'll send you the information.
Topic: Face-to-face meeting
Jon: Big week next week. AJAXWorld mon-wed. OpenAjax f2f thurs.
Mobile Ajax workshop on friday. Our generous hosts MS need to know who
will be attending. Is there anyone here who will be attending that
hasn't added their name to the registration page?
(one person says yes and then adds his name to the registration
Jon: I included a link to the f2f agenda in the agenda for this
meeting. If anyone has suggestions about missing topics or other
changes, please tell me.
Topic: OpenAjax Registry
(Jon asks everyone to navigate to
http://www.openajax.org/Registry <http://www.openajax.org/Registry> and
subdirectories. Explains the assessments/ subdirectory and the
search_globals.html tool which loops recursively through the window
Bertrand: What does the logic do?
Jon: Starts with window object. for/in loop to get all
properties. If a property is an object, then recursive go through that
Bertrand: Should be easy enough to add logic to look at the
built-in types and add lookups for HTML extensions.
Jon: Please send in the code.
Bertrand: Will do.
Jon: Feedback on this approach?
Howard: Have companies do this themselves.
Bertrand: Yes, in everyone's interests to submit accurate
Howard: Self-police. We aren't trying to do this for everyone in
Jon: Yes. I was thinking that toolkit vendors would submit an
HTML file along with their proposal registry entry.
Howard: Some toolkits have many instantiations. Don't want to
put a burden on ourselves to study all of those permutations.
Jon: How about we encourage them to use the tools.
Howard: At some level, it is like the InteropFest.
Jon: OK, here is a proposal. I'll take this discussion and
update the Registry wiki page to reflect this discussion then send an
email telling everyone to review the diffs. Any objections to this
Jon: Next proposal is that we start with some easy well-behaved
toolkits to see if the Registry process works for them. Then add a
toolkit such as Prototype that extends core objects. Then look at MS,
which is likely to be more complex.
Bertrand: How about json.js instead of Prototype.
Jon: Yes, good idea.
Topic: Hub 1.1
Jon: This is largely a repeat of things we have talked about
many times, but this time we are all together so I will present this
again. The target features for Hub 1.1 are to extend pub/sub beyond a
single frame to cross-frame, add a framework for secure mashups, and add
mediated comet support per the work in the CommHub task force. The
proposed process is to have volunteers work on experimental open source.
This is the same process that we used for Hub 1.0. People produced
experimental open source. When the open source was ready, we talked
about it and decided what we liked and didn't like. We consolidated
contributions from multiple sources, such as some of the Tibco/Dojo
contribution with some of the Nexaweb contribution. What do people
Jon: The SMash team has already submitted their source code to
the open source project. I am expecting them to transform the SMash code
into a form such that it will be upwardly compatible with Hub 1.0. When
that is at a point, we will look at it just like any other contribution.
Jon: The timeframe I have in mind is to have working code by the
end of 2007. If there isn't enough volunteer effort, I will probably
have bandwidth after the horrible week next week to do some of this work
Topic: Version string issue
Bertrand: Don't feel too strongly one way or the other. Not sure
it is worth ...(lost what he said)
MikeP: Is the issue whether we think people will want to do
version number comparisons?
Ted: ODBC has had success with four numbers separated by dots
followed by arbitrary text. The version comparison is rarely needed in
early phases but is used more in later phases.
(others - thumbs up on ODBC's success in this area)
Frederick: What is the purpose of the free text?
Jon: I can only guess what Adam had in mind and assume that most
often it would be used to say alpha N or beta M or build N.
Frederick: Human readable?
Ted: Yes. But the leading numbers can be used for comparison.
Jon: Here is what I propose. Ted sends links to ODBC specs. We
agree in principle to adopt the ODBC approach pending detailed review.
But no real decision until we review the ODBC specs. Any objections?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the security