►
From YouTube: OpenJS Foundation Standards Team - 2020-10-06
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
It
looks
like
we're
live,
are
we
live
okay,
thumbs
up
and
the
the
band
practice
is
in
session?
It's
our
standards
working
group
meeting
this
open,
js
foundation.
A
Group
of
interested
persons
and
standards
long-winded
way
of
introducing
our
group.
We
have
two
and
a
half
agenda
items
for
today
and
the
first
was
tagged
by
the
one
and
only
brian
cardell,
I
believe,
a
home
for
reference
implementation
polyfills.
This
is
issue
number
106
and
it
extends
from
conversations
that
we
had
last
year
at
the
w3c
technical
plenary
and
advisory
council
meeting.
A
B
B
There
are
proposals
that
go
from
a
speculatively
polyfilled
idea
that
just
like
some
community
group
works
on
all
the
way
through,
as
that
gets
more
fleshed
out
and
then
at
some
point
it
becomes
a
true
polyfill,
where
it's
shipping
in
some
browsers
and
you're,
just
providing
something
to
fill
the
gaps
for
everybody
else,
and
there
is
sort
of
no
connection
or
life
cycle
around
those
there's
no
way
for
them
to
make
sure
that
we
have
a
way
to
find
them
or
evaluate
them
or
link
them
to
a
specification
or
make
sure
that
they
don't
experience
just
entire
bit
spec
rot.
B
So
the
idea
was
if
we
could
provide
an
easy
way
for
those
communities
to
submit
their
things
to
the
open
jsf
as
a
place
for
those
to
live
in
perpetuity,
make
sure
that
they
continue
to
exist
and
that
they've
checked
all
of
the
right
sorts
of
boxes
and
maybe
for
the
w3c
to
introduce
into
their
spec
templates
a
way
for
them
to
link
to
them,
so
that
developers
can
help
evaluate
those
technologies
as
they're
developing,
in
other
words,
to
like
meet
developers
where
they
live,
which
is
a
thing
that
we
have
worked
on
kind
of
for
a
long
time
to
improve
the
communication
back
and
forth.
A
I
see
two
of
our
participants
with
their
hands
raised
and
I
apologize.
I
missed
this,
so
jordan,
your
hand
is
first
in
the
order
and
let
me
check
in
with
you
cool.
C
Yeah,
so
I
don't
maintain
w3c
polyfills
generally,
but
I'm
one
of
like
a
very,
very
short
list
of
people
that
maintains
widely
used.
Javascript
language
polyfills
like
me,
and
one
other
person
or
pro
are
the
top
two
depending
you
know.
I
don't
know
which
order
is
which,
depending
on
the
week
but
and
then
there's
a
very
long
gap
to
the
next
person,
who's
also
on
tc39,
and
then
there's
very
little
people
after
that.
C
So
the
there
really
isn't
a
community
of
polyfills
that
needs
collecting
and
managing
because
like
in
the
sense
that,
unless
the
two
or
three
of
us
decided
to
pool
our
resources
on
the
same
polyfill,
which
would
be
wise
but
there's
different
technical
choices
that
we've
all
made.
You
know
and
that's
why
that
hasn't
happened
like
these.
Each
of
these
is
our
single
maintainer
projects
and
will
likely
be
for
the
duration.
C
I
think
that
it's
that
the
general,
the
generic
advantages
of
a
foundation
right
that
prevent
like
bus
factor,
type
problems
and
things
like
that
are
good,
like
good
to
apply
to
a
polyfill
ecosystem,
but
the
real
challenge
is
finding
maintainers
and
being
in
a
foundation,
doesn't
necessarily
help
that
problem
unless
it's
like,
unless
it
can,
unless
what
the
foundation
is
doing,
is
removing
obstacles
concrete
obstacles
that
the
existing
maintainers
have
identified
between
them
and
new
new
contributors,
which
is
usually
going
to
be
money.
I
think
so.
C
I
guess
I'm
skeptical
about
this
as
an
idea
as
like
a
a
concerted
effort
and
then
separately,
like
javascript
spec
proposals
already
do,
link
to
any
and
all
polyfill
implementations
that
are
out
there
to,
but
specifically
to
avoid
like
blessing
one
of
them
as
like
this
is
the
endorsed
implementation.
C
Tc39
has
tried
really
hard
not
to
do
that
to
like
not
say
that
this
is
the
golden
implementation
of
this
part
of
the
spec,
and
you
know,
and
everything
else
is
just
trying
to
catch
up,
and
I
would
be
surprised
if
w3c
didn't
share
us.
The
similar.
B
C
C
Then
long-term
maintenance
of
those
things
is
the
challenge,
and
I
I
if,
if
the
js
foundation
the
opengs
foundation
could
solve
that
problem,
then
awesome
like.
I
have
many
many
packages
that
could
use
that
help
polyfills
or
not,
but
I'm
not
under
the
impression
that
that's
a
problem
that
that's
a
human
problem.
Anybody
really
knows
how
to
solve.
Yet.
A
D
I
think
jordan
made
most
of
the
points
that
I
was
going
to
make.
I
I
guess
the
you
know,
the
maintenance
is,
you
know,
shared
maintenance
effort,
isn't
is
super
important
as
as
he
pointed
out,
and
I
think
when
I
was
writing
polyfills
kind
of
some
of
the
things
that
made
it
a
lot
easier
were
just.
I
think
I
don't
know
jordan.
D
Can
I
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
I
think
you
or
daniel
erenberg
had
put
together
some
project
templates,
and
you
know
those
kinds
of
things
smoothed
away.
C
So
that
that
was
for,
I
have
I
maintain
a
template
for
for
proposal
repositories
specifically
and
separately.
We
had.
I
had
brought
up
a
topic
in
tc39,
of
which
dan
and
I
were
the
largest
participants
where,
because
I
did
not
think
it
was
a
good
idea
for
a
proposal
to
publish
a
polyfill
it
be
for
that.
C
For
the
reasons
I've
mentioned,
like
blessing
of
polyfil
and
so
on,
and
the
I
think
that
project
templates
are
a
good
idea,
but
they're
like
for
shims
or
polyfills,
but
there
are
a
lot
of
technical
decisions
that
are
made.
That
kind
of
can't
be
generalized.
C
So,
like
that's
a
problem,
I
would
very
much
love
to
see
solve.
That
would
definitely
help
the
polyfill
and
ship
communities,
but
yeah,
I'm
not
sure
if,
if
project
templates
would
add
a
ton
of
value.
D
So
the
the
the
the
thing
of
value
there,
just
to
reiterate
so
that
I
I
kind
of
understand
being
able
to
run
tests
on
a
bunch
of
different
platforms.
You
know,
I
guess
you
might
mention
that
the
large
organizations
that
that
do
serious
browser
development-
they
all
have
kind
of
test,
pooling
and
test
resources
and
and
having
something
that
would
let
a
small
project
fan
out
tests
easily
would
would
ease
development.
C
Yeah
I
mean
yeah,
I
mean
I
don't
even
think
babel
or
typescript.
Maybe
babel
does
but
like
runs
test.
262
tests
against
their
output
so
like
and
and
those
are,
are
significantly
larger
than
my
teeny
little
packages
or
you
know
all
the
single
maintainer
polyfill
projects
that
are
out
there,
but
but
all
of
them
could
use
the
benefit
of
of
compliance
testing.
A
So
mike
champion
also
had
some
questions
that
to
put
to
this,
and
I
think
it
kind
of
gets
around
what
we're
saying
as
well,
which
is
like
what
audience
are
we
really
looking
to
see
the
benefit
you
know
of
this
committee's
work
in
in
this
space,
which
basically
set
of
constituencies
do?
Would
we
want
to
serve-
and
I
think
brian
and
I
have
had
some
long-ranging
conversations
about
this
as
well?
Where
we
talked
about
you
know.
A
Maybe
this
is
a
resource,
or
this
is
something
a
benefit
to
just
the
broader
developer
community,
because
we're
I'm
providing
some
central
place
for
information
about
them,
but
we're
also
hearing
like
threads
of
you
know
how.
How
could
this
be
a
benefit
to
the
polyfill
maintainers
themselves,
with
testing
or
with
maintenance
or
whatever?
A
B
Like
actually
running
tests,
but
yeah,
I
think
I
think
definitely
part
of
the
idea
here
is.
B
C
I
mean
that
would
also
be
a
step
towards
some
kind
of
standardization
among
the
way
the
polyfills
are
written
anyway.
Right
because,
like
you,
you
know
a
way
to
run
tests
could
involve
some
sort
of
adapter,
but
we
could
also
design
it
so
that,
if
you,
if
your
api,
is
a
certain
way,
then
you
don't
need
an
adapter
and
that's
it's
easier
and
that
would
gently
push
the
ecosystem
towards
that
approach
right
and
the
more
the
ecosystem
kind
of
had.
C
C
But
in
practice
I
think
it's
also
rare
that
there's
more
than
one
choice
and
that
when
there
is
more
than
one
choice,
typically,
the
one
that
has
an
outsized
amount
of
usage
is
probably
the
best
choice
and,
like
I
I've.
If
we
find
concrete
cases
where
that's
not
the
case,
then
that
would
be
really
compelling
but
like
if
you
just
look
at
all
of
the
alternatives
out
there
for
probably
filling
a
thing.
C
A
F
That's
okay.
I
I
just
wanted
to
ask
like
a
really
quick,
like
raise
a
really
quick
point
of
order
and
kind
of
ask
a
question
to
the
room,
since
we
have
tried
consistently
here
to
make
the
standards
working
group
a
team
that
facilitates
collaboration
and
kind
of
relationships,
as
opposed
to
being
a
place
where
the
work
necessarily
directly
happens.
F
Michael
dawson
has
his
proposal
that
he's
putting
together
that
that
landed
around
like
I
keep
forgetting
the
name
of
it,
but
it's
like
not
working
groups
but
like
community
groups
where
people
can
like
kind
of
get
together
and
do
work
under
the
foundation
itself.
I'd
like
to
propose
that
perhaps,
and
I
know
we
have
extra
time
on
the
schedule-
collaboration
network.
Thank
you
joe.
My
gut
on
this.
F
Is
that,
like
our
working
group
and
our
charter
and
our
scope,
that
this
is
the
work
item,
that's
being
discussed
is
out
of
scope
for
us
right
now
and
that
perhaps
a
collaboration
network
group
that
wanted
to
focus
on
polyfills
could
be
spun
up
to
do
this
work
and
focus
on
this
work.
And
if
that
were,
if
the
work
done
in
that
group
was
something
that
they
wanted
to
interface
with
other
standards
organizations
on,
then
we
could
act
as
facilitators
for
them
and
that's
in
no
way
trying
to
like
say
that.
F
I
don't
think
that
this
work
is
important
or
that
we
shouldn't
be
doing
it,
but
more
so
that
to
like
maintain
this
group's
charter
as
a
facilitator
that
seems
appropriate.
Now,
the
flip
side
would
be
if
this
is
the
kind
of
work
that
we
think
that
this
working
group
should
do.
That's
pretty
cool
too,
like.
F
I
think
that
this
is
important
stuff,
but
I
think
that,
like
for
the
sake
of
our
meetings
and
our
focus
of
the
meetings
like
kind
of
debating
the
specifics
of
this,
I
I
feel
like
we
should
have
like
a
broad
ask
from
a
group.
That's
not
us!
That's
working
on
that
for
us
to
facilitate
discussion
and
if
I
misunderstood
and
that's
what's
being
asked
for
apologies,
but
just
wanted
to
kind
of
make
a
point
of
order
in
that
distinction
and
just
ask
to
the
room.
If
my
reading.
B
Yeah
tell
us,
I
actually
a
little
bit
agree
with
you
miles.
That's
like
why
the
issue
is
not
exceptionally
specific.
This
actually
is
facilitation
in
the
other
direction,
because
it's
coming
from
people
in
standards
who
are
like
this
is
a
need,
at
least
in
the
w3c
standards
and
jory,
and
I
have
also
heard
from
like
individual
developers
who
also
have
had
these
thoughts,
so
we
thought
we
probably
should
bring
an
issue
about
like.
Is
there
an
interest
here
in
helping
not
necessarily
like
specifically?
F
Yeah-
and
I
guess
to
like,
like
an
answer
to
that
in
my
personal
opinion-
would
be
this
sounds
absolutely
in
scope
for
a
collaboration
space
within
the
foundation.
We'd
need
someone
to
want
to
champion
that
and
run
it,
and
I
would
imagine
kind
of
like
next
steps
that
I
would
see
here
would
be.
You
know,
brian.
If
you
wanted
to
lead
that
and
I'm
not
trying
to
volunteer
you
more
just
like
you
seem
to
be
interested
in
it
and
jordan
if
you
wanted
to
get
involved
because
it
seems
like
you
have
opinions
here.
F
This
seems
like
the
kind
of
thing
where,
like
the
next
steps,
would
be
setting
up
a
collaboration
space
trying
to
build
some
other
momentum
around
it.
And
then,
if
that
group
wanted
to
do
something
more
official,
that
involved
like
a
liaison
relationship,
then
they
can
kind
of
bring
a
proposal
to
this
group
asking
for
specific
resources
that
they
need.
G
B
F
So
I
want
to
make
sure
that
for
like
those
folks
that
there's
a
clear
space
where
they
can
go
and
a
clear
space
where
they
can
ask
for
that
support
and
we're
kind
of
keeping,
you
know
a
clear
separation
there.
But
again
you
know
my
philosophy
and
view
doesn't
always
align
with
everyone.
So
please
don't
take
this
as
like
what
we
absolutely
need
to
do.
Just
trying
to
be
consistent.
A
A
You
know,
okay,
this
committee,
who
may
or
may
not
all
be
interested
in
volleybills,
for
example,
so
that
it
makes
sense
to
me-
and
I
think
also
the
collaboration
space-
may
be
more
flexible
for
us
to
sort
of
figure
out
what
it
is
that
that
we
want
to
do,
but
where
this
intersects,
with
what
populations
like
our
committee,
thinks
that
we
want
to
and
prioritize
serving,
I
think,
is
very
important.
A
You
know,
for
example,
if
the
collaboration,
if,
if
this
committee
felt
that
you
know
we
really
want
to
serve
and
maintainers
and
core
maintainers
those
developers
as
a
first
priority,
then
then
perhaps
that
informs
the
kind
of
activity
that
the
collaboration
space
takes
up
first,
as
opposed
to
say
servicing
a
broader
population
of
consumers
of
the
of
these
technologies.
A
This
is
like
you
know
that
that's
like
slightly
different,
so
I
think
that's
where
we
would
like
any
thought,
but
I
think
we're
kind
of
sounding
like
we're
saying
the
maintainers
as
a
first
priority
sounds
like
to
me
so.
A
Cool
any
other
thoughts
on
this
before
we
move
to
the
next
topic.
E
G
A
G
I
think
michael
dawson
said
today:
it's
I
think
it's
a
done
done
done
deal.
He
has
some
ideas
on
what
those
collaboration
spaces
might
be,
and
so
I
think,
probably
going
to
michael
and
if
you're
interested
in
a
polyfill
one
is
suggesting
that
as
one
of
the
first
first
few
joe
is
that
right,
characterizing
that.
E
Yeah,
as
far
as
I
know,
board
approved
today,
I
think
brian
confirmed
and
michael
who's
gonna
merge.
It.
A
Okay,
so
it's
a
real
thing:
now
it's
the
real
deal
so
will-
and
it
sounds
like
the
action
item-
is
for
jory
bryan
brand
jewelry
combo
to
talk
to
michael
dawson,
about
initializing
a
space
for
poly
fillers
yeah,
like
the
ideas
for
team
names,
are
endless
here.
I'm
really
excited
about
that.
A
Thank
you
and
thank
you.
Donovan,
slash
anonymous
bat
for.
A
All
right
number
102
is
the
other
agenda
item
or
the
other
issue
that
was
tagged
for
our
agenda
today.
I
believe
that
we
discussed
this
fairly
thoroughly
and
gus
and
was
clear
on
their
next
steps.
So
I
want
to
check
in
that.
This
is
actually
one
that
we
can
remove
the
tag
from
unless
we
feel
and
maybe
maybe
jordan
or
miles
or
or
richard
maybe
y'all
know,
and
whether
there's
anything
further
that
that
guest
needed
here.
A
B
D
A
G
A
Bam
that
is
done,
okay,
so
the
other
that
I
said
two
and
a
half
agenda
items
earlier.
A
So
we
don't
have
an
an
issue
for
this,
but
as
as
mike
champion
mentioned
when
he
was
introducing
himself
at
the
beginning
and
he
did
have
to
drop,
and
he
and
robin
and
myself
had
and
brian
in
the
chat
and
had
long-ranging
sort
of
like
briefing
him
on
our
activities
so
far,
and
I'm
helping
him
kind
of
just
get
familiar
with
our
past
work
and
what
we're
looking
to
do.
A
I
think
we
are
planning
on
having
something
of
a
brainstorming
session
and
sort
of
a
strategy
focus
session,
and
I
think
he
does
plan
to
or-
or
I
will
do
so
on
his
behalf
and
open
an
issue
for
that,
so
that
we
can
make
sure
everybody's
aware
and
prepped
in
advance
that
we'll
we'll
have
more
of
a
strategy
session
and
in
the
coming
weeks
so
similar
to
how
we've
thought
about
the
collab
summit
in
the
past
as
an
opportunity
to
like
get
together
and
really
like
brainstorm
on
specific
topics.
A
F
A
More
useful
and
consumable
for
our
communities,
and
so
that
we
have
more
productive,
ongoing
and
meetings,
which
is
something
that
brings
me
joy.
I
don't
know
about
you.
I
have
four
copies
of
a
book
called
leading
great
meetings.
If
anybody
would
like
to
borrow
it
because
yeah
makes
me
happy
anything,
you
know
when
you
think
about
like
strategizing
for
2021.
Is
there
any
topic
or
question
on
your
mind
that
you
would
want
to
put
to
the
group
for
framing
or
thinking
ahead
of
time?
That
would
be
very.
H
Personally,
most
of
my
concerns
about
what's
going
on
here,
are
about
how
this
group
communicates
with
with
with
the
community
the
larger
community,
and
you
know
I
found
out
a
meeting
or
two
ago
about
some
of
the
the
mailing
lists,
so
I
wasn't
subscribed
and
I
I
haven't
seen
a
thing
come
across
those,
so
I
don't
know
how
active
they
are,
how
they're
used
how
they're
you
know.
What's
going
on
there.
H
And
you
know
those
there
need
to
be
I'm
going
to
use
the
word
list.
If
you
will,
I'm
not
sure
it's
the
right
thing,
but
for
for
for
us
we're
talking
about
standards,
issues
that
we
want
to
make
sure
member
projects
are
aware
of.
That's
that's
that's
what
I'm
still
not
completely
clear
on
even
having
gone
to
the
list
now
and
seeing
what's
there
yeah.
B
A
A
Do
we
think
that
there's
anything
that
we
don't
know
like
and
that's
sort
of
like
okay?
So
of
course
there's
lots
of
things
I
don't
know,
but
is
there
anything
on
this
topic
that
makes
it
hard
to
move
forward
because
we
feel
like
we
don't
have
a
firm
enough
answer
on
bam
and
that's
why
it's
unclear,
or
you
know
we
could
use
some
more
guidance
from
this
group
over
here.
You
know
like
is
there
are?
Is
there
missing.
A
A
Was
asking
if
so,
if
we
had
any
missing
info
like?
Is
there
any
anything?
We
don't
know
or
anything
that
we
could
use
like
more
clarity
on
in
order
to
like
feel
like
we
can
move
more
purposefully,
and
so
then
I
was
making
a
clarissa
explains
it
all,
except
for
you
walked
into
the
frame.
So
it's
like
it's
just
that.
They
explain,
though,.
B
Maybe
like
it's,
it's
really
possible
that
I
also
have
thought
about
this
in
the
wrong
way.
It
might
be
a
good
to
ask
the
individual
projects
how
they
would
like
to
be
represented
like
how
they
would
like
to
be
involved
because
openjsf
has
grown,
and
it's
like
it's
considerable
amount
of
things
now
and.
B
A
I
do
too,
and
I
feel,
like
that's
a
fairly
simple
and
straightforward
a
bit
of
information.
We
can
try
and
gather,
especially
if
we
keep
it
fairly
open-ended
in
terms
of
polling.
You
know
which
might
be
simple
as
asking
them
a
couple
of
open-ended
questions
and
that's
something
we
can
feel
pretty
quickly,
because
it's
a
known
group
of
people
and
perhaps
have
to
share
and
discuss
during
that
that
strategy
session,
would
you
all
be
amenable
to
a
quick
google
form
style.
B
A
Well,
look
at
me.
I
just
want
to
jump
in
with
both
feet
sink
or
swim
jordan,
so
I
yeah
we
could
wait,
though
I
mean
maybe.
B
A
B
B
A
F
A
Okay,
cool
all
right!
So
that's
that's!
That's
an
action
item
we
can
take
and
and
use
that
info.
I
think
that
would
be
useful
all
the
way
around
okay.
A
So
let's
close
this
half
a
half
item
out
because
it
wasn't
technically
on
the
agenda.
Sorry,
and
thanks
for
for
y'all's
consideration.
A
If
you
want
to
continue
to
just
chew
on
some
ideas
and
and
thoughts
for
like
what
you
might
want
to
cover
in
our
strategy
session,
please
do
that
and
and
either
leave
that
in
the
standards,
chat
or
poke
myself
or
robin
or
mike
champion
or
brian
and
volunteering
brian
here
and
we'll
we'll
make
sure
to
get
that
on
an
agenda.
So
my
expectation
would
be
that
this
brainstorming
strategy
session
might
be
something
that
we
do
for
maybe
not
the
next
standards
meeting,
but
the
one
after
that.
A
Plenty
of
notice
for
folks
who
are
interested
but
for
whom
this
may
not
be
the
best
time
are
there?
Is
there
any
other
business
any
other
things
that
I
I'm
not
thinking
about
that
you
are
that
need
to
be
shared.
A
Okay,
cool,
so
just
also
a
reminder:
tpack
is
coming
up
at
the
end
of
the
month.
If
they're
opening
up
breakouts,
if
there's
any
breakout
that
you
want
to
propose-
or
if
you
are
that
you
want
to
participate
in
or
anything
of
that
sort
and.
A
Let
me
know
I
can
link
you
all
all
of
the
places
where
you
might
be
able
to
go
see
that
agenda
coming
together.
So.
A
A
Oh
lord,
now
that
would
be
it
that'd
be
a
thing
I
wouldn't
know.
Should
we
not
be
live
on
youtube.