Interoperability Minutes 2006-05-24
From MemberWiki
Minutes from OAA Interoperability committee teleconference - 2006/05/24
Great meeting today!
Contents |
Attendees:
- "Adam Peller" <apeller@us.ibm.com>
- "Alex Russell" <alex@dojotoolkit.org>
- "Arno Puder" <arno@puder.org>
- "Chris Schalk" <chris.schalk@oracle.com>
- "David Temkin" <temkin@laszlosystems.com>
- "Eddie O'Neil" <ekoneil@bea.com>
- "Gary Horen" <ghoren@bea.com>
- "Jeremy Chone" <jchone@adobe.com>
- "John Crupi" <john.crupi@jackbe.com>
- "Jon Ferraiolo" <jferrai@us.ibm.com>
- "Ken Fyten" <ken.fyten@icesoft.com>
- "Kevin Hakman" <khakman@tibco.com>
- "Phil Berkland" <berkland@us.ibm.com>
- "Rüdiger Herrmann" <rherrmann@innoopract.de>
- (Luke from TIBCO also joined, but I don't have his contact info yet)
Missing:
- "David Frankel" <david.frankel@sap.com>
- "Michael Peachey" <mpeachey@tibco.com> (May have joined late)
- "John Janetos" <jjanetos@laszlosystems.com> (Attended the Marketing call instead)
- "Ross Dargahi" <ross.dargahi@zimbra.com>
AGENDA:
- Logistics: IRC, email lists, WIKI, web site
- Teleconference times and frequencies
- What interoperability issues will we tackle and how to prioritize
- Alex's proposal for toolkit interoperability
TOPIC: Logistics: IRC, email lists, WIKI, web site
We agreed that we would use all of the following: IRC, email lists, and web site.
Alex started an IRC channel (#oaa-interop) at freenode. He said it was likely that we could just start using that channel without any sign-up and that it was unnecessary to request control over the "oaa" prefix.
- ACTION on Alex to research getting a logging bot set up on this channel. Due date: before the next teleconference (i.e., June 7).
Alex suggested the following IRC clients: Mac-Colloquy, Linux-XChat, Windows-mIRC (or XChat)
No one objected to using JotSpot for the Wiki. Assuming JotSpot, we still need to figure out whether we will pay for it or take advantage of having a former JotSpot developer on the committee. We agreed to use WIKI for posting documents in process. Jon suggested that we post a page for each committee that defines its charter and roadmap. No objections to this idea. Jeremy asked if the WIKI was private or public. Jon suggested that we do our committee work in private areas and then promote completed/approved work to public areas (WIKI or otherwise). No objections to this approach.
No one objected to hosting the OAA web site at www.kattare.com. Email lists would be part of the web site.
TOPIC: Teleconference times and frequencies
We agreed that teleconferences happen every two weeks at 8AM US/Pacific, 11AM US/Eastern, 5PM Europe/Paris. That means our next phone call will be on Wed. June 7. Miraculously, there were no objections to this time slot. In a straw poll, there were at least 10 people voting in favor of this time slot.
TOPIC: What interoperability issues will we tackle and how to prioritize
Someone mentioned IDEs (do we focus on one or focus on many), but most of the discussion was on integrating "toolkits" (which means JavaScript UI libraries). Kevin suggested we focus initially on getting toolkits to fit nicely together, then move up from there. DavidT and others agreed. Potentially, on WIKI we work out a list of interoperability requirements that every toolkit must support: widgets, drag&drop, event model, component model, etc. There is apparent agreement that we should focus initially on toolkit interoperability.
Kevin suggested we need to be careful about not painting ourselves into corners and focus on simple, low-hanging fruit approaches. DavidT agreed. Jeremy suggested we work on well-defined use cases and define timeline objectives for what interoperability we want to have at particular future times. Jon agreed and suggested that timelines are part of our roadmap which is part of our charter. Jeremy and Jon (perhaps others) agreed with the general principle of doing simultaneous work on implementations and interoperability specifications and attacking low-hanging fruit issues first. Arno suggested that we provide interoperability showcases. There were no objections to this, but someone said "anything but Pet Store" and Jon said there are process issues we need to work through. Jeremy said vendors would love to have an opportunity to show off their compatibility.
DavidT says we need to define whether our scope includes Flash and Java. He mentioned how Scott Deitzen had an "allergic reaction" and said that Ajax has nothing to do with Flash and Java. Kevin said that with the Flex-Ajax bridge, Adobe has opened up Flash sufficiently to be considered. Jeremy said that MXML model is out of scope, but the way the Flex-Ajax bridge works, the integration is at the JavaScript level, just like the Ajax toolkits. Someone (David?) suggested that we ensure that there is a minimum requirement that everything must work in native browser contexts. Jon said something similar, but expressed it in terms of that everything we define must be supported natively in the browser without plugins, but things like Flash and Java are Ok if they fit into the architecture and provide value-add additions to the Ajax platform - customers must be able to implement Open Ajax web sites without Flash, but it's OK to use Flash within Open Ajax architecture. Jeremy said he agrees. Goal is that Flash can be used. DavidT said we need to pursue very small native browser integration interfaces. Flash controls could plug in without people knowing its Flash, but requirement that you can achieve Ajax without Flash. Focus is on HTML+JS. Ok to fit other things into this framework. Jon commented on Laszlo's approach to taking XML and spitting out HTML or Flash, saying we shouldn't be antagonistic to this approach and allowing higher-order integration points for such an approach, but the OAA focus is on delivering HTML+JS to the client. Kevin said TIBCO has demonstrated feasibility of Ajax/Flash integration already.
TOPIC: Alex's proposal for toolkit interoperability
URL: http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/oaa.tar.gz
Alex summarized his proposal. Instead of working on a large interoperability spec, have toolkits define where they might behave badly and have this group evaluate and judge. Focus initially on a small set of basic interoperability points. In particular, load/unload handlers and a publish/subscribe event mechanism. Someone commented on big work around global namespace management. TIBCO said that Alex's approach fits nicely with their approach. There was quick discussion about DnD and Alex mentioned the possibility of an OAA prefix. Jeremy said that this proposal was a great start towards defining an approach for events and said Flex should be able to plug in. There was discussion about whether DnD qualifies as a use case. (Probably yes.) Jeremy suggested Google Finance is a use case. Jon asked about whether we need to formalize namespaces along the lines of how XML Namespaces work, based on URIs, based on registered domains. Jeremy said it is good if OAA owns some areas to avoid collision and promote interoperability. Jon asks how we do that. Alex says that we should just say we own it and make a big deal of it. Jon agreed this would work.
Alex suggested that OAA become an industry moderator entity. Jon said there were process issues to address, but probably this is correct and probably can be done. No one objected to OAA playing an industry moderator role.
Someone mentioned that other toolkit teams need to be aware of our work.
- ACTION: Jon to contact toolkit groups in the OAA who are not on the committee to make sure they are aware and have a chance to join. (Soon)
- ACTION: Jon to contact toolkit groups the OAA to make sure they are aware and have a chance to join. (Sometime soon.)
Summary of ACTIONS:
- ACTION on Alex to research getting a logging bot set up on this channel. Due date: before the next teleconference (i.e., June 7).
- ACTION: Jon to contact toolkit groups in the OAA who are not on the committee to make sure they are aware and have a chance to join. (Soon)
- ACTION: Jon to contact toolkit groups the OAA to make sure they are aware and have a chance to join. (Sometime soon.)
