IDE Minutes 2007-07-19

From MemberWiki

Jump to: navigation, search


Attendees this week

  • Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai(at)>
  • Kevin Hakman <khakman(at)>
  • Phil Berkland <berkland(at)> representing Eclipse ATF project
  • Bertrand Le Roy <Bertrand.Le.Roy(at)>
  • Wayne Beaton <wayne(at)>
  • Eddie O’Neill <ekoneil(at)>
  • Greg Murray <greg.murray(at)>


(continuing to review and finalize Kevin updated the document as decisions were made in the meeting.)

Kevin: For line item that says "SHOULD describe controls and APIs", since that's what we are doing, promote to MUST?

Phil: MUST

Kevin: Any objections?


Kevin: OK, I changed it to MUST and marked it APPROVED.

Kevin: Next - MAY be sufficient to auto-generate help docs. Kevin too weak?

Kevin/Bertrand: too weak. Change to SHOULD

Jon, Eddie: Lots of issues, including internationalization, may be too difficult for first version of our specification, especially given desire to move quickly. Keep as a MAY.

(resolution: left as MAY and marked as APPROVED)

(discussion about item that says MUST describe properties. Decided to APPROVE)

(discussion about MUST include name (non-namespaced), unique ID (namespaced). everyone had same idea, just how best to word it)

Jon: How about "globally unique identifier"?


Kevin: How about Jon's issue about the title near the top?

(much discussion about whether we should replace the section title "Ajax Control Metadata" with "Ajax Library Metadata" or "Ajax Control and Library Metadata". discussion about terminology, where we define "library" to be a collection of controls and APIs)

Greg: Only dojo has anything substantial at the library level. Other toolkits are just collections on independent controls.

Kevin: Let's change the title to "Ajax Control and Library Metadata" but not mark it as APPROVED quite yet.

Greg: Tangent discussion. How does this work relate to W3C Widgets? Lately I am getting questions.

Jon: W3C Widgets is a small spec having to do with installable desktop gadgets. It has 3 parts: zip packaging; a small xml metadata file for things like gadget width, gadget height, and URL for communications; and then a couple of DOM APIs. Very much different than what this group is doing. We are defining standards around IDEs. Conceivably, a developer could use an IDE to create a fragment of Ajax which could be included in a mashup, represent a whole browser page, or become the UI for a desktop gadget.

Greg: Maybe our IDE documents should talk about this difference.

Jon: I am thinking an OpenAjax white paper that talks about all of the terminology that is confusing to the industry would be good.

(next bullets: provide valid options, describe methods, describe events all APPROVED)

Kevin: Now the extensibility bullet. I propose a small change to the wording. "such as the" changed to "example: concepts like".


(next two bullets: MAY address group/category for widget, MAY address resources for widget. Kevin wanted to know about whether categories should be a SHOULD, but other convinced him that there are differences in IDEs that makes SHOULD not appropriate. We ended up making these two times APPROVED based on current language.)

Kevin: Should non-visual controls be a MUST?

(no response)

Kevin: OK , leave a SHOULD. and APPROVED.

Kevin: Easily updatable item.

Phil: I updated the language to take into account Bertrand's comments.

Kevin: Any objections?


Kevin: Must support 3rd party controls. How about rewording this to say 3rd party controls that are conformant with our IDE spec?

(Changed, APPROVED)

(lots of discussion about whether to include metadata about browser versions supported.)

Bertrand: Sometimes you need a negative list, as in this control will not work with a particular browser.

Jon: Most common situation is that a toolkit lists the browsers and versions that they claim to support.

Bertrand: Hard to maintain a list

Jon: That's why it is a MAY


(Because of Ajax Experience next week, NEXT MEETING IS IN TWO WEEKS)

Personal tools