►
From YouTube: WG Component Standard 20200728
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Okay,
good
morning,
folks
welcome
to
the
tuesday
july
28
2020
working
group
component
standard
meeting
today,
joe
searchy,
also
known
as
phoenix
blue,
is
on
our
agenda
and
he's
going
to
be
talking
about
object,
meta
in
component
configs,
so
we'll
just
give
joe
a
minute
here
to
get
set
up
and
then
joe.
Let
me
give
you
I
can
give
you
ability
to
screen
share
too
okay
by
making
you
a
co-host
and
then
before
you
show
your
screen.
Just
remember,
like
close
anything,
that's
possibly
sensitive,
sure
yeah.
A
Yeah
yeah
I've
had
to
plug
my
I've,
got
one
of
those
magic
track
pads,
but
I
have
I
have
to
plug
it
into
my
laptop
because
there's
some
bug
in
chrome,
with
like
two-factor
auth,
with
security
keys,
where,
if
I
have
bluetooth,
turned
on
it,
thinks
that
I'm
trying
to
use
a
bluetooth
security
key
and
it
crashes
chrome.
For
some
reason.
Every
time
I
hit
a
two-factor
screen,
gotcha
yeah,
I've.
B
B
A
B
Let
me
know
if
you
guys
can't
see
it
looks
good
to
me
all
right,
so
I
went
through
and
I
did
another
round
of
updates
to
address
some
of
the
initial
comments
that
you
had
michael
and
I
think
for
those
that
I
like
mark
has
resolved.
I
think
that
those
are
pretty
pretty
good.
B
B
Some
of
these,
though,
were
I
I
either
didn't
understand
which
direction
you
were
trying
to
go
in
or
wasn't
sure
if,
like
needed
to
knock
them
out
now
before
this
gets
approved,
so
the
the
testing
guidelines
piece.
This
was
one
where
the
I
believe
this
is
like
noted
to
sorry.
B
B
A
B
Okay
and
then
that
kind
of
leads
to
the
next
piece.
B
So
I
think
I
I
updated
this
as
far
as
the
scope
and
making
the
comment
that
this
is
already
matches.
A
subset
of
the
rdga
object,
mata
schema,
and
this
is
just
for
tool,
compatibility
and
then
so
some
of
these
questions
around,
if
applicable,
how
will
the
component
be
upgraded
or
downgraded
in
this
case,
since
we
were
kind
of
talking
about
supporting
both
with
object,
meta
and
without
object,
meta
for
at
least
some
time
period?
B
I
wasn't
sure
if
it
was
relevant
to
note
that
here
or
exactly
how
that
might
fit
into
this
section
yeah.
It
would
be.
A
A
good
idea
to
at
least
have
a
note
that
just
sort
of
says,
hey
just
think
through
the
scenario:
okay,
we're
going
to
add
a
field
to
the
api.
That's
a
pretty
typical
thing
that
we
do.
You
know
we're
pretty
sure
this
will
be
a
backwards,
compatible
change
and
like
be
compatible
with
other
tooling.
A
We're
also
pretty
sure
that
it's
required
to
maintain
compatibility
with
tooling.
Once
we
turn
on
strict
decoding
right.
B
Okay
and
that's
you
know
where,
like
jordan's
comment
here
around
accepting
but
ignoring
the
object,
meta
fields,
I
wasn't
sure
if,
if
the
target
here
like,
if
it
was,
if
he
had
issue
with
kind
of
the
lenient
path
there
and
wanted
us
to
get
some
more
of
a
strict
path
or.
A
That's
what
he's
saying
and
I
think
that's
what
we're
trying
to
do
by
implementing
this
like
it-
allows
us
to
go
to
the
strict
path
without
breaking
people.
I
mean
it'd,
be
worth
pinging
him
on
slack
and
just
kind
of
saying,
hey
like
I
didn't
really
understand
your
comment:
okay,
yeah
yeah,
jordan's,
a
nice
guy
he'll
help
you.
B
B
I
don't
know
like
the
fact
that
we're
talking
about
component
configs,
here
versus
kind
of
like
component,
like
changes
to
the
components
themselves,
was,
was
kind
of
dicey
and
understanding
exactly
how
it
fit
in
to
answer
some
of
these.
A
Yeah,
some
of
them
you
can
probably
just
put
like
not
applicable
for
okay.
You
know
it's
more
just
to
go
through
the
exercise
of
thinking
about
it.
Yeah
I
I
think
it
was
the
cap.
I
wrote,
there's
there's
probably
some
examples
of
kind
of
thinking
about
it
for
config,
in
that
instance,
specific
config
cap,
okay,
I'll
check
that
out
that
I
wrote,
but
it's
mostly
just
trying
to
think
like
all
right,
we're
gonna
people
are
gonna
upgrade.
A
You
know
just
write,
a
sentence
that
like
tells
me
why
it's
not
gonna
break
okay
and
it
could
be
as
simple
as
well.
You
know
it's
just
a
new
field
in
the
api,
it's
optional
to
set
it,
and
so
it
wouldn't
break
and
then,
if
you,
you
know,
have
to
write
for
downgrades
too,
then
you
say
like
well.
You
know
somebody
downgrades
today
it
wouldn't
break
because
we
have
the
lenient
path,
but
you
know,
and
in
the
future,
when
we
turn
on
the
strict
path.
A
B
Especially
for
the
time
being
since
there's
lenient
path,
so
like
some
of
these,
I
just
kind
of
put
that
in
there
you
know
they
kind
of
spell
that
out
in
a
simplistic
way.
B
So
I
don't
know
if
you've
been
able
to
go
through
and
kind
of
look
at
some
of
the
most
recent
changes
to
see.
I
can
I'll
take
another
run
today
at
it.
B
I
think
those
are
the
big
items
yeah
and
then
the
the
only
other
thing
was
based
on,
like
you
had
one
comment
there,
where
I
think
you
had
asked
out
to
to
somebody
else
to
kind
of
confirm
if
stable
seemed
more
correct
here
since
the
component
config
apis
were
and
object,
meta
in
general,
like
were
things
that
already
kind
of
existed
and
were
stable,
so
it
was
initially
marked
as
alpha.
B
A
B
All
right
yeah,
I
think
that
covers
most
of
the
questions
that
I
had
on
on
this
stuff,
just
kind
of
looking
to
hopefully
move
it
a
little
more
forward,
especially
now,
since
it's
kind
of
trimmed
down
to
just
you
know,
name
yeah,.
A
Yeah,
it
shouldn't
be
too
complicated
to
go
from
here
all
right,
joe
I'll,
take
another
run
at
this
later
today,
just
to
address
some
of
those
new
changes
thanks.
Thank
you
cool
all
right.
So
that
was
our
only
agenda
item
for
this
morning.
Does
anybody
else
have
anything
they
would
like
to
talk
about.
B
Appreciate
it,
you
bet
sorry,
it's
it's
taken
quite
a
while
on
this
one.
No.
C
And
there's
high
consistency
and
there's
eventual
consistency,
high
availability.
B
A
Funny
yeah,
but
thank
you
joe
all,
right
I'll,
give
everyone
back
a
little
bit
of
time
in
their
lives
here
and
I'll
see
folks
in
office
hours
who
are
interested
in
chatting.
There.