Interoperability Minutes 2006-11-15
From MemberWiki
Full minutes: /member/wiki/Interoperability_Minutes_2006-11-08
Attendees
- Adam Peller <apeller@us.ibm.com>
- Alex Russell <alex@dojotoolkit.org>
- Coach Wei <coach@nexaweb.com>
- Gideon Lee <glee@openspot.com>
- Greg Murray <greg.murray@sun.com>
- Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>
- John Sheridan <john.sheridan.dublin@gmail.com>
- Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai@us.ibm.com>
- Phil Berkland <berkland@us.ibm.com>
- Rama Gurram <rama.gurram@sap.com>
- Rick Evans <Rick.Evans@Sun.COM>
Original Agenda
- Should the OpenAjax Hub support IE5? (Responses so far: many vote no)
- What to do if multiple versions of same library are used on same page?
- Progress report on whether/how we can use JSUnit (given the GPL/LPGL/MPL license)
- IBM position: OK to use JSUnit for testing, but can't be part of distribution
- Proposals from Jon for series of ten (10) minor changes to OpenAjax Hub
Minutes
Topic: Should the OpenAjax Hub support IE5? (Responses so far: many vote no)
Jon: more than 10 people said no. One person said -We should try-. We should not worry about it. Anybody object?
Resolution: we will not support IE 5.x.
Topic: What to do if multiple versions of same library are used on same page?
Jon: There is a version string is passed in at the registration time. How to deal with the version string is up to the individual toolkit.
Greg: from jMaki, if you include Yahoo UI widget and YahooMap in the same page, there are conflicts. What if somebody else registers dojo outside of the hub?
Jon: if people don’t conform to the hub, it is their problem. We should require as little changes as possible to the toolkits.
Alex: if we provide an API, we still need to lobby toolkit vendors to do something.
Jon: yes, there is companion to the hub, which is to promote best practices. For example, statements about accessibility.
Jon: as a separate topic, how do people feel about working on toolkit best practices?
Rick: I think it is a good idea, though not sure what are best practices, but willing to help.
Jon: we should clarify what we meant by toolkit: widget, framework, or server side integration as well?
Greg: we should try to avoid server issues, right?
Jon: The alliance is investigating what we should do with server side integration.
Jon: the most critical thing for the eco-system is to enable different toolkits can work together in a “mashup” scenario.
Jon: let’s go one more time. Anybody has more comments on multiple version of the same library on the same page?
[silent]
Jon: ok. Let’s look at best practice
Greg: a good starting point maybe to add it to posts. For example, https://blueprints.dev.java.net/bpcatalog/conventions/javascript-recommendations.html. This can be extended in a big way, to library providers too.
Topic: Progress report on whether/how we can use JSUnit (given the GPL/LPGL/MPL license)
IBM position: OK to use JSUnit for testing, but can't be part of distribution
Jon: I took action to research on this topic. Talked to IBM lawyer, who is against inclusion of JSUnit for distribution because it is not licensed under Apache license.
Jon: my recommendation with JSUnit - do not use it for distribution. Alternatives maybe using Dojo’s testing framework, or provide it as a separate download.
Jon: the next step - what we do if we can not distribute it?
Coach: a separate download of JSUnit would work fine.
Jon: I’ll take a look at it and provide a recommendation on how to provide JSUnit as a separate download.
Topic: Proposals from Jon for series of ten (10) minor changes to OpenAjax Hub
/member/wiki/JonFerraiolo_20061115_Hub_Proposals
Jon: I’ve provided a proposal for changes in the open source project. There are ten items.
Jon: proposal 1 and 2
Jon: proposal 3: Add additional APIs around library registration and management
Coach: that’s great.
Jon: proposal 4,5,6,7 and 8 are about forward looking ways to deal with events, eg. Compatible with DOM 3 event spec.
Alex: we don’t any code to deal with that.
Jon: One example is resize, load event if you don’t have any namespace to it, W3C owns the no namespace event domain. If there is an event associated with a toolkit, that is associated with the toolkit namespace;
?: why not put a namespace such as window to the W3C events?
Alex: Window is the default for all JavaScript
Jon: in a browser world, the event can be handled by various ways such as JavaScript, XML events, etc.
Alex: for OpenAjax, we are only dealing with JavaScript, not other programming languages, right?
Jon: Right.
Jon: we want to be compliant with W3C. If we equivalent an event to a namespace, we are compatible with W3C DOM 3 events. As a result, we don’t need to special case for “load”, “unload” events for example.
Alex: if we have JavaScript event listener for every event on the same page, there is going to be a lot of code and processing. We don’t want that.
Jon: capturing all events is not feasible. We are not proposing that.
Jon: aligning with the W3C model seems to be a good idea.
Coach: it makes sense.
Jon: I’ll highlight proposal 7 this should be in the best practice document.
Coach: this looks like a concern for individual toolkits, not openAjax;
Jon: reserving openajax: prefix, any comments?
Jon: next proposal: Add context object to publish/subscribe APIs
Alex: if I want to know the context, I can send it and subscribe it from a topic.
Coach: if I want to publish an event related to my toolkit, such as stock information, how does it work with the current hub?
Alex: you publish it with a prefix of your toolkit, give it a function name, and then I pass along whatever argument I want with the function, which may include the context object.
Jon: that means we don’t need the context object from this proposal. And Proposal 9 and 10 are unnecessary.
Jon: proposal 11 still needs some thinking.
Jon: next steps, split the hub into four files and make a set of changes before the next meeting. I propose to do this and people can make comments later.
Coach: sounds good.
Jon: I’ll try to have some skeleton progress on the spec too.
