Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
98 lines (90 loc) · 10.2 KB

2021-03-notes.md

File metadata and controls

98 lines (90 loc) · 10.2 KB

MDN Product Advisory Board video meeting, March 2021

Attendees: Reeza Ali (Microsoft), Dan Appelquist (Samsung), Sukriti Chadha (independent), Daniel Ehrenberg (Igalia), Dominique Hazael-Massieux (W3C), Brian Kardell (Igalia), Joe Medley (Google), Chris Mills (Mozilla, Chair), Sheila Moussavi (Bocoup), Robert Nyman (Google), Kyle Pflug (Microsoft), Ali Spivak (independant)

Logistics

  • Date/Time: March 17 2021, 09.00 Pacific / 17.00 UK time / 18:00 Europe
  • Location: Mozilla Zoom room

Agenda

  1. Updates on active issues
    1. (Robert) Discuss more about where web compatibility updates should live
      1. Some decisions to make, more discussion to have?
      2. Major areas of focus being blogged on Monday by MS and Google.
      3. This provides a way to show that we've listened to your feedback e.g. in MDN Web DNA.
      4. It provides a positive feedback loop
      5. A bigger item here is to try to move forward with the browser compat data ribbon idea. We should start by writing up an RFC on what the BCD ribbon should look like, what it should do, etc. ACTION ITEM
      6. Dom — we also discussed having some kind of celebration when particular milestones are reached. What to do here?
        1. What role does MDN play here?
        2. Tweet successes on MozDevNet?
        3. Show the latest progress on MDN? Embedded dashboards?
        4. If we ask for feedback, we are obliged to show what happened as a result.
        5. ACTION ITEM: Brainstorm milestone success broadcasting ideas
    2. (no assignee) Write plan for better BCD presentation
      1. Chris wrote these ideas down for possible BCD improvements.
      2. ACTION ITEM, ALL: Provide feedback on Chris's ideas.
    3. (Robert, Chris) Write proposal for plan and process for Web DNA survey 2021, [Work on process and framework for MDN short surveys](https://github.com/mdn/pab/issues/83]
      1. ACTION ITEM, ALL: Provide feedback on Robert's docs!
        1. Short surveys on MDN: Process
        2. Short surveys on MDN: Guidelines
        3. Short surveys on MDN: Technical requirements
    4. (Dom, FlorianS) Write up proposal for MDN RFCs
      1. Largely done, just needs process and format documentation?
      2. We also need to think about the process of getting RFCs improved/approved. Who should review these? related standards communities, etc.? Guidance on where to broadcast, and where to distribute them for review should be included in the documentation.
      3. ACTION ITEM, CHRIS: Document the process of writing up the RFCs.
    5. Brainstorm how we can better integrate MDN with other GH-based functions such as spec process
      1. A lot of interest on this one; could do with someone looking through all the old discussions, consolidating, and writing a plan for what we should do moving forward.
      2. Most obvious first step is to write a suggested update of the TAG explainer template that would make it more transferable onto MDN when the time is right. Joe already has something like this, so let's look at using that first rather than write another one.
      3. Also, consolidate this with other similar issues:
        1. #23
        2. #26
        3. #65
      4. Dom — Not just in early life of spec, but also would be good to figure out how to signal requirements for new items to be documented.
        1. some (very) recent work Dom did in seeing MDN gaps in evolution of WebAuthn (which is going to be published as Level 2 Rec very soon) https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webauthn-adoption/2021Mar/0003.html
      5. Joe — tried to change the form of explainers from within Google.
        1. Explainer writers all tended to say that their explainers only contain pseudocode, and are only supposed to give a rough idea of what the spec is for
        2. Also a political thing — TAG wouldn't let Joe in to discuss this
        3. New specs are highly volatile.
      6. Reeza ideas
        1. It sounds like there's a relationship between a spec being available and docs get written/updated. Do we have "milestones" when a spec needs to get documented or updated? Can we use GitHub labels to flag when a spec was created/updated, and the docs needs to get written/updated?
          1. Could we get something more browser neutral?
        2. in W3C, reaching Candidate Rec is probably a good milestone to check whether documentation exists (docs can naturally exist well before; but not having it at CR is probably a bug)
          1. Many would agree here
      7. ACTION ITEM: Would generally be nice to have someone write up a clear plan here with action items, and consolidate the different issues
      8. ACTION ITEM: Joe to send around his proposal for the TAG explainer rewrite, to see if we can make use of it.
      9. BRIAN - A bunch of new things now start inside WICG/Open UI, so maybe that is a good place to discuss this?
        1. ACTION ITEM: Brian to see if these groups could help (possibly, not sure if this is a definite action item).
    6. Create proposal for new membership process and make it clear what they can get out of the membership
      1. This is really on me (Chris) to do, but I'd like someone to check my proposal at least
      2. ACTION ITEM: Chris to write this up and put it on MDN.
    7. Looking into MDN compatibility data integration with Lighthouse
      1. This is pretty interesting still...
    8. Contact Bing to see how they do snippets
      1. Still useful to consider, with Bing and other search engines?
      2. Also related: #43
      3. Also: #45
  2. (Robert) The relationship between this meeting and all the other ones, such as Editorial, Opportunity Assessment, BCD and OWD meetings?
    1. This is for Chris/Hermina really.
    2. There are lots of different touch points now, lots of meetings. There are different constellations of people, some overlap in meeting discussions, and sometimes important people are missing from various discussions
    3. Where does PAB fit into all of this now?
    4. Could we merge some meetings, or do we just need to be a bit more careful about where things are discussed, e.g. make sure BCD topics are discussed in the BCD meeting?
    5. Chris: Probably more like the latter, as all the meetings do have distinct purposes:
      1. MDN editorial meeting (Mondays, 9am PST): A weekly standup meeting for MDN content creators to talk about work they are doing right now, and bring up issues/concerns. Usefully, some of the MDN dev team attend this meeting, so it is also a good place to talk to them about issues that may require dev input.
      2. MDN content opportunity assessment (once per month, Wednesday, 9am PST): This is where we discuss new opportunity assessments, see what we feel about them, and rank them against other opportunity assessments, to see what the strongest contenders are for being added to the roadmap in the next quarter.
      3. BCD meeting (once every 2 weeks, Wednesday, 9am PST): This can be considered to be a regular project meeting for the BCD project. Normally you have a regular project meeting for active projects, but BCD is always happening, and always important, so. This is for discussing issues specific to BCD.
      4. OWD editorial steering committee meeting (every week, Wednesdays, 8.30am PST): This is for updates with the OWD project content work, and has possible overlap with the MDN editorial meeting, but that's OK.
      5. PAB meeting (once per month, Wednesday, 9am PST, this meeting): High-level strategic discussions on MDN's future.
    6. Kyle — not 100% clear how much of the current overlap between e.g. PAB meetings / OWD / various high-touch content workstream is deliberate vs. coincidence. There may be places to consolidate if the audiences/topics are common. All of these are valuable but right now it’s a lot of similar groups wearing different hats at different times.
    7. ACTION ITEM, CHRIS - Look at meetings, be deliberate about summarizing overlap

Action items

  • ??: Brainstorm milestone success broadcasting ideas for web compatibility updates.
  • ALL: Provide feedback on Chris' ideas for possible BCD improvements.
  • ALL: Provide feedback on Robert's docs for short surveys on MDN:
  • CHRIS: Document the process of writing up the RFCs, and soliciting feedback on them. DONE
  • ??: Get someone to write up a clear plan for integrating MDN with other GH-based functions such as spec process, with action items, and consolidate the different issues
  • Joe: Send around his proposal for the TAG explainer rewrite, to see if we can make use of it. DONE
  • BRIAN (MAYBE?): See if the WICG and Open UI groups could help with MDN/Spec touchpoints (possibly, not sure if this is a definite action item).
  • Chris: Write up PAB membership process and put it on MDN. DONE, checking with Mozilla legal to make sure wording is OK before sharing it with PAB.
  • CHRIS: Look at potential meeting overlap and distribution of discussion topics, think about being more deliberate about summarizing overlap.

Next meeting

Video call — April 21 2021