Table of Contents

Date

Mar 21, 2018

Action items

Add new action items here.

Meeting notes

AW: Since Symphony LLC is not in attendance, there's only so much we can do. But does anyone have thoughts on whether this working group should be part of the Symphony program, or given a broader mandate to create a more generic container/application API specification and placed in another program?

WQ: This will be tied to the Symphony APIs, right? So that’s a focal point here. It’s an API to be connected to a container of choice.

NK: I agree. The charter for the group is not to define a generic container API.

WQ: Definitely not.

NK: No interest from OpenFin in generic container/application API. Don’t see a huge need in the application landscape. Desktop.JS is done to solve problems that that team has. But the problem set is not that big at the generic surface level. If you look at things like progressive web apps (W3C), there’s a lot being done there.

AS: Echo Nick’s sentiment, Desktop.JS is MS-specific.

AW: Nick, are you able to say anything about OpenFin's ongoing discussions with Symphony LLC.

NK: We are continuing to work on top of the APIs and there are discussions happening with Symphony. We’re committed to supporting the APIs as long as Symphony LLC is. From our side, there’s no problem. We came up with an open standard that everyone agreed on. I’m not sure what gaps there are in communication, but I’m not sure why there’d be an issue.

AW: Brian, anything to add to what Aaron said re: the usefulness of a general desktop/container API specification.

BI: Room for consideration of a separate working group, but this isn’t the forum for that.

Agenda

Attendees