07:14:17 RRSAgent has joined #ddwg 07:14:17 logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-irc 07:14:20 scribenick ronan 07:15:08 bmarks has joined #ddwg 07:15:22 Meeting: Device Description Repository Workshop, day 2 07:15:36 Chair: Rotan 07:16:00 ronan2 has joined #ddwg 07:16:11 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html asamim 07:16:25 RCasero has joined #ddwg 07:16:54 scribenick: ronan2 07:16:59 scribe: ronan2 07:17:15 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/DDWG/workshop2006/agenda 07:17:37 Zakim has joined #ddwg 07:19:47 sboyera has joined #ddwg 07:21:06 ping 07:21:27 cedric has joined #ddwg 07:21:49 inaki has joined #ddwg 07:22:48 Rotan recaps some activities to date 07:22:53 Luca_Passani has joined #ddwg 07:23:13 DDR -- where does its scope end - what information should be in it 07:23:26 If DDR is extensible, others can add to it 07:23:36 But our scope is really the browser characteristics 07:23:51 It is important that the architecture does not preclude extensions 07:24:10 DKA has joined #ddwg 07:24:11 We have to balance expediancy with practicalities 07:24:29 Would be good to get something working as soon as possible, and extend as appropriate 07:25:01 Mapping different pieces of information from different contributers could be a challenge, but it is important that we support this 07:25:30 But it is important that the DDR can be seen as a single repository 07:25:50 An important use case is the input of new information 07:26:09 How to label the trust associated with this information 07:26:23 A federated approach for information should give scalability 07:26:52 The W3C will produce a recommendation -- it is not a standards body, though the recommendations carry the weight of standards 07:27:34 Along with a recommendation should come a proof that what has been recommended will work 07:28:06 The recommendation could be just that or we could actually make recommendations of interfaces, along with proof of concepts 07:28:38 ..with real data behind it 07:28:57 DD version 2 may cover this 07:29:31 Some have suggested that the basic info in the DD would be something that could be contributed from WURFL, OMA etc 07:29:50 The other participants could use this as seeding activity and validate against their own data 07:30:00 This would be starting core of data for DDR 07:30:03 mimasa has joined #ddwg 07:30:28 We have already discussed what we consider to be the basic required information for basic adaptation 07:30:35 .. about a dozen attributes 07:31:11 See http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-irc#T07-30-35 07:31:15 Where this info actually resides is open for debate 07:32:02 There is a link to the OMA liasion statement on the DDWG home page 07:32:14 cf. http://member.openmobilealliance.org/ftp/Public_documents/TP/Permanent_documents/OMA-LS_0122-to_W3C_MWI_re_Device_Description_Respository-20060712-A.zip 07:32:35 We now need to lay out the charter for the next tranche of work 07:33:28 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html mimasa 07:34:06 The DDWG is a MWI initiative, so this should be our primary concern 07:34:21 ScribeNick: ronan2 07:34:33 Edward: raised an issue yesterday about whether this is limited to mobile browsing 07:35:04 Rotan: The DDWG is a MWI initiative, so this should be our primary concern -- but we should not preclude non-mobile use cases 07:35:04 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html mimasa 07:36:45 Telefonic presenttation begins 07:36:53 07:37:10 s/Telefonic/Telefonica/ 07:37:25 Presentation is about DDR design and implementation 07:37:39 Given by Jose Cantera 07:39:24 The technology around the repository is as important as the repository itself 07:39:42 ... but it is important not to reinvent the wheel 07:40:15 Seemless integration with existing standards is very important, but there will be a need for new mechanisms 07:40:47 Rotan has joined #ddwg 07:40:54 Both UAProf and WURFL have some limitations 07:41:27 E.g. UAProf lacks mandatory attributes 07:41:29 s/scribenick ronan/ScribeNick: ronan2/ 07:41:43 WURFL lacks a central repository 07:41:49 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html mimasa 07:42:35 WURFL also lacks warranty and update notifications 07:43:09 The DDR architecture should be open and extensible 07:43:48 ScribeNick: ronan2 07:44:12 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html mimasa 07:44:28 sb2 has joined #ddwg 07:44:37 ping 07:45:00 The DDR could solve the problem of having to copy WURFL files to multiple machines 07:46:27 Proposes distributed federated model where different organizations maintain different chunks of information 07:46:43 But all the complexity hidden by a set of standard APIs 07:47:13 It is important that applications can override attributes 07:47:31 imarn2 has joined #ddwg 07:48:46 ronan3 has joined #ddwg 07:49:09 * I got kicked off 07:49:18 scribenick ronan3 07:49:45 ScribeNick: ronan3 07:50:33 Versioning of the data is important 07:51:58 It is very important to support interop between the different repositories - e.g. a standard XML export format 07:52:39 There should be support for multiple different ways to provision new devices 07:53:01 Andrea has joined #ddwg 07:53:04 q? 07:53:06 q+ 07:53:51 Workflows will need to be defined around this 07:54:41 There could be a model for pay-per-use 07:54:59 .. associated with private device descriptions 07:55:55 DDR security model should support a number of use cases 07:56:24 Anonymous users, premium users, provisioning user, validating user, data manager 07:58:11 DDR validation and trust 07:58:32 Validation means ensuring that the device description is correct 07:59:09 Data should not be made public until it is validated 07:59:35 DDR APIs and tools 08:00:02 OMG IDL should be used for the APIs 08:00:46 Interfaces should be described WSDL 08:01:34 Design of the APIs should be aligned with existing DIWG work 08:02:01 There would probably be a set of web tools to manage this 08:02:19 Relationship with OMA & UAProf 08:02:53 Provisioning level data should be compatible at a minimum 08:03:40 Reference Implementation 08:03:49 Should be open source project 08:04:15 Telefonica are committed to be involved in this 08:05:00 MORFEO project can be used 08:05:26 Rotan: W3C has not done this before, but it certainly is possible that we could do this as open source project 08:06:16 Presentation ends 08:06:24 q? 08:06:48 q 08:07:12 q+ 08:07:15 qplus 08:07:39 Andrea: you said device inheritance is needed -- why is this? 08:07:53 q? 08:08:02 Andrea: thinks it should not be a requirement even though it was successfule for WURFL 08:08:10 mimasa has joined #ddwg 08:08:18 Jose: requirement is that the provisioning model is as easy as possible 08:08:19 [any plus enable person can add Dan and i in the queue ?] 08:08:34 See http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-irc#T08-08-19 08:08:47 q? 08:08:52 ack and 08:09:01 Andrea: as long as you have the device info in your repository, the admin can easily link related devices 08:09:10 q\ 08:09:30 Andrea: device clustering -- if there is a model with no inheritance it will be easy to build device clusters 08:09:33 [good try dan, i tried already] 08:09:44 Andrea: inheritance is often a technical barrier 08:10:09 [i tried lso opera and IE, this is not a problem related with the browser] 08:10:23 q+ chris 08:10:38 Jose: without inheritance how can your API indicate hierarchy of devices? 08:10:54 Andrea: thinks that inheritance does not solve this problem 08:10:58 q ± 08:11:08 Jose: inheritance and clustering are different 08:11:18 qctrl-177 08:11:43 Jose: Branches and grouping are different 08:11:57 q+ DKA 08:12:32 Andrea: inheritance tree does not work e.g. some Samsung phones have the Nokia browser 08:12:45 Andrea: this would not easily be covered by inheritance 08:13:01 Rotan: proposes that we address this work as second charter 08:13:01 q bmarks 08:13:13 q+ bmarks 08:13:40 q- bmarks 08:13:42 q+ dave 08:13:43 q+ dave 08:14:02 ack chris 08:14:31 Chris: says that inheritence should not be part of the model - encourages people not to put data in 08:15:17 chris: any query is automatically a cluster - cluster does not need to be explicitly part of the model 08:16:01 q? 08:16:42 ack dka 08:16:43 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html asamim 08:17:01 DKA: Expresses support for Telefonica vision and method (open source framework) 08:17:08 (Note we are having queue management problems because of the lack of a + symbol.) 08:17:17 DKA: Would support this initiative if it happens with developers 08:17:42 Luca: I invented inheritance in WURFL but it has been double edged sword 08:18:04 q? 08:18:08 ack luca 08:18:10 Luca: WURFL willl introduce modules to avoid multiple inheritance problem 08:18:14 q+ steph 08:18:29 Luca: API should not rely on fallback mechanism to be there 08:19:25 Andrea: how can you do this? Voda imposes its own specidications on J2ME specs for example 08:20:05 Andrea: these families are specific to you -- may not be of use to anyone else 08:20:16 mimasa-sp1 has joined #ddwg 08:20:30 sboyera: The application is what decides the 'family', not the repository 08:21:10 Luca: doesn't understand why this belongs at API level 08:21:49 Luca: it's important to provide just one way to do things 08:22:04 Rotan: need to discuss this in 2nd charter 08:22:30 bmarks: these are implementation issues -- not a good use of the group's time at this point 08:23:15 sboyera: What is missing is technology of indexing -- what do we use to index the information? UA string? 08:23:32 I also wanted to ask what Jose means by "Device deprecation". Did he mean "deprecation of device description"? 08:23:57 sboyera: The vocabulary will cause a problem - how can we unify the properties beyond the initial 15 or so 08:24:19 Lastly, why couldn't an open-source implementation provide signed DD's? If the open-source can establish a process, then DD's can be verified 08:24:21 Jose: the W3C will not define the extensive vocabulary -- this will be done by OMA etc 08:24:22 Observation, clustering can be external to the data (just like semweb annotation). Just an idea. 08:25:31 Dave: what is the difference between the Telefonica vision and the current requirements? Seems like the vision is beyond current requirements? Are there any gaps? 08:26:00 Jose: there may be gaps in provisioning, security and pay per view aspects of vision 08:26:40 Dave: need to have requirements updated for charter 2 08:26:51 Next presentation commences 08:27:20 Presentation by Technosite 08:27:47 "Strategies for tailoring web content for specific devices" 08:28:09 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html mimasa-sp1 08:29:05 Disabled users have many problems with web access on mobile devices 08:29:14 s/Presentation by Technosite/Topic: Presentation by Technosite/ 08:29:15 nacho has joined #ddwg 08:29:23 Propose 2 solutions 08:29:39 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html mimasa-sp1 08:29:40 1) Best practices 08:29:46 2) Device descriptions 08:30:57 q bmarks 08:31:29 s/Telefonica presenttation begins/Topic: Telefonica presenttation/ 08:31:48 q+ bmarks 08:31:53 08:31:53 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html mimasa-sp1 08:32:19 List of best practices presented 08:32:20 q+ to ask if accessibility community would maintain a ddr node with accessibility info 08:32:47 s/presenttation/presentation/ 08:33:49 DDR should help adapt content to mobile devices and assistive technologies 08:34:04 DDR should include accessibility/usability information 08:34:25 There are h/w and s/w aspects to this 08:35:10 Some assistive hardware and software solutions mentioned 08:35:50 jcantera has joined #ddwg 08:35:57 q? 08:35:59 Summary: it is important that the DDR takes into account assistive technologies 08:36:26 ack dave 08:36:30 ack steph 08:36:33 ... the needs of users with diabilities should be be considered 08:36:47 Presentation ends 08:36:51 q? 08:36:58 ack bmarks 08:37:09 I'm logging. I don't understand 'draft minutees', mimasa-sp1. Try /msg RRSAgent help 08:37:21 q+ 08:37:31 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html mimasa-sp1 08:37:46 bmarks: Many man/machine and UI issues with phones are similar those problems we have on the PC 08:38:59 bmarks: We are talking to a community that has to deal with the same issues - some of these issues will already occur in DD 08:39:00 rrsagent, agenda ? 08:39:00 I'm logging. Sorry, nothing found for 'agenda ' 08:39:19 q- 08:39:23 bmarks: It's a smaller increment in the mobile environment than in the PC environment 08:39:54 bmarks: the question is how to best describe the techogies that are already being applied 08:40:23 bmarks: There are other motivations for solving these problems in the mobile space that create synergies 08:40:50 bmarks: the data should fit fairly well into the visions that have been described 08:40:50 ack Rotan 08:40:50 Rotan, you wanted to ask if accessibility community would maintain a ddr node with accessibility info 08:41:50 Rotan: if the DDR is distributed, with multiple contributers, could we have a node of the DDR that contains the accessibility information -- question to presenter 08:41:53 s/techogies/technologies/ 08:42:18 Rotan: will the accessibility community use such a feature? 08:42:24 q? 08:43:55 Rotan: we don't care where the data comes from as long as we know we can trust it 08:44:26 ping 08:44:40 ack jc 08:45:24 Jose: do you know the set of capabilities that will be needed for disability information? Will there be a module in vocabulary that will be devoted to this? 08:45:34 q? 08:47:05 Jose: are there specific attributes that are related to accesibility? 08:47:09 q 08:47:52 q? 08:48:25 Rotan: WAI has published guidelines in this area, but there is no machine readable information that would help adaptation 08:48:33 Nacho: we should liase with WAI 08:49:29 08:49:31 Rotan: this information is useful only when it is in a node in the DDR 08:49:59 ... perhaps some agencies would populate this node and sponsor it 08:50:18 s/liase/liaise/ 08:50:28 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html asamim 08:50:32 [plus sign worked for me yesterday but not today... weird] 08:51:50 q+ 08:52:50 Rotan: if we imagine that DDR exists, how does an author know what the properties mean? How does the authoring tool make sense of this? How do you get human readable information out of the DDR? 08:53:06 Luca: you read the implemetation from a website 08:53:21 sb has joined #ddwg 08:53:25 [it seems to me like Ronan is filtering the minutes] 08:53:31 test 08:53:39 sb, you work 08:53:42 Luca: documentation could be in XML, tools could import this 08:53:57 q? 08:54:01 ack luca 08:54:31 Rotan: should there be mechanism for adding international descriptions 08:54:39 Dave: let's walk before we run 08:55:10 http://win.mpwgateway.net/MPWServices/soap.php 08:55:29 bmarks: had a similar problem with UAProfs and semantics 08:55:52 jose, nuSOAP is not a full SOAP implementation. Unfortuntaly lacks some important things 08:56:01 bmarks: as long as you have a semantic contract you allow the market place to layer on the extra stuff later 08:56:23 bmarks: it would be a mistake to build this into the system -- it can be built on top 08:56:50 bmarks: these are business opportunities that may come later, not something for the w3c 08:57:13 Rotan: but what about an English description? 08:57:43 bmarks: It's more important to establish the machine readable semantic contract 08:58:21 Rotan: the meta data describes the data -- the meta meta data describes the data to a human, perhaps in an authoring tool 08:59:03 When you get to 100's of attributes, the problem becomes serious 09:00:56 Rotan: question about Telefonica presentation -- exporting the data from a node -- what about all the relationships in the data -- would you expect this data to be exportable? 09:01:37 ... If the data is a black box, the hierarchy information might not be useful to anybody else -- another node 09:01:40 q+ bmarks 09:02:22 Rotan: the XML format inherently has the hierarchy built into it 09:02:45 Rotan: would you expect the meta data relationships between the nodes to be exported? 09:02:54 Jose: thinks that the meta data should be exported 09:03:03 q+ 09:03:07 q+ andrea to say something about exporting and importing 09:03:18 ack bmarks 09:03:19 bmarks: There is easy way to agree on flat node definition 09:04:08 ... there was a similar issue with UAProf -- they agreed that each node was standalone 09:04:25 ... This makes the data very big 09:05:08 ... You can't know a priori how the data will be used 09:05:27 Nice phrases - "exportable single unit" and "atomic unit of export" 09:05:35 q- 09:05:36 ... So you have to go through the process of defining the atomic unit for export, otherwise it'll all fall apart 09:05:41 +1 to Bennett 09:06:27 ... For machine readbility, the contract needs to travel with the node 09:06:43 1 also 09:07:01 s/1 also/+1 also/ 09:07:08 ... UAProf wa criticized for verbosity but not for technical issues -- this is not b/w sensitive 09:07:30 ... Recommends that we don't try to manage the hierarchy 09:07:39 ... This is a business opportunity 09:08:00 Luca: agrees with bmarks 09:08:56 ... We should stick to the API .. ignore the underlying implementations 09:09:27 ... Leave to each implementor how they want to model internally 09:09:48 Rotan: surface level export is enough] 09:09:56 Break for coffee 09:09:59 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html asamim 09:11:25 mimasa-sp2 has joined #ddwg 09:17:50 See http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-irc#T09-11-25 09:22:18 Martin2 has joined #ddwg 09:23:00 test 09:33:07 See http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-irc#T09-23-00 09:33:52 Andrea has joined #ddwg 09:34:03 Topic: Mobile Phone Wizards presentation 09:34:47 ScribeNick: Andrea 09:34:59 Topic: Mobile Phone Wizards presentation 09:35:05 [thanks mimasa] 09:35:11 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html asamim 09:37:04 njal: wanted to develop a service that would require 3 lines of code to integrate 09:37:20 ... real-time header analysis is key for us 09:37:54 ... would like to see the DDR as a definition of the box, but not what is inside 09:39:04 Chris: understand the customer. Provide a PDF if the customer wants it, even if the device does not currently support it. The customer might install the acrobat reader later 09:39:35 njal: our repository automatically updates itself 09:39:45 ... no need for update/batch procedures 09:40:17 ... provide may interfaces such as SOAP, POST, .NET 09:40:56 Chris: admin interface allows for sync between different nodes 09:41:05 ... ability to resell access to the system 09:41:22 njal: currently running on 4 main servers, 3 in Bergen, 1 in USA 09:41:50 Chris: clients can rely on our servers or might want to have a local server for performance reasons, for example 09:44:06 ... the server is proactive in gathering device information 09:44:16 ... most common devices go to the top automatically 09:44:20 q? 09:45:04 Bennett: how do you create profiles? 09:45:23 njal: we do no testing. Sources are UAProf and getting on internet to get information 09:46:02 Chris: try to make sure device info is correct, but don't have connections with manufacturers, for example 09:46:11 Bennett: how many capabilities do you list? 09:46:16 Chris: 200-300 09:46:56 njal: when a new profile is detected in one of the servers, there is no need to search for it. gets added automatically 09:47:41 Rotan: can you query if the data you're getting is data verified by you (Mobile Phone Wizards) 09:48:01 Chris: there's a bit that says if data is from manual insert or automatic 09:48:19 ... you can query the "manual DB" or the automatic DB 09:48:27 mimasa has joined #ddwg 09:48:38 ... you can query about a device or a specific device capability 09:48:53 Bennett: when you index a device to a profile, how do you do the matching? 1 to 1? 09:49:17 Chris: what I call an instance of a phone is the sum of all the HTTP headers 09:49:28 ... not necessarily all device of the model will match that instance 09:49:56 ... sessions tend not to change in time 09:50:14 ... we calculate the profile once and cache. 09:50:40 q+ 09:51:50 Chris: we have a lot of fields that will tell you is_series_60, is_xhtml, is_wml 09:51:56 ... seem really useful to us 09:52:14 ... tries to identify the browser and separately the JVM, for example 09:52:28 ... tries to identify the different software parts of the device 09:52:54 ack Luca 09:53:32 Luca: supporting a certain mime type does not mean the full support. xHTML is a good example, its support does not mean tables are supported 09:53:46 Chris: we try to be very conservative 09:53:51 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html asamim 09:55:05 Bennett: there is a lot of alternative about how you create data. Real testing, reading documentation, etc. 09:55:12 ... this all goes down to the trust metrics 09:55:37 Chris: there is a trust system in our solution that is about how we get the data 09:56:11 Bennett: algorythm can be very powerful, but there can always be some kind of exception 09:58:21 q- 09:58:59 Chris: geo-location service. We cache ip ranges to make this faster 10:00:58 s/algorythm/algorithm/ 10:07:16 Rotan: how do you see yourself in this working group? 10:07:42 njal: we would be happy to see a standard, but also fear the standard might be too different from our existing architecture 10:07:55 Rotan: there is certainly a lack of standard in this field 10:08:20 njal: I think we should start with standardizing the interface or might get into a work that is too big and too far in the future 10:09:00 Rotan: your service seems like a live proof of concept 10:09:07 ... thank you for the presentation 10:09:27 Topic: WALL overview 10:09:55 Luca: this was not a planned introduction, but seemed like there was an interest 10:10:17 (Rotan gives some extra cycles to his computer) 10:11:26 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html asamim 10:16:40 Luca: WURFL could be considered by some as UAProf on steroids 10:16:55 Bennett: someone else might think it's castrated UAProf 10:37:13 Jose: do you think this satisfies all the needs? 10:37:39 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ddwg-minutes.html mimasa 10:37:50 Luca: WALL is for people who don't know much about mobile or even nothing. They take WALL, build this HTML-like pages and WALL takes care of everything 10:38:02 ... if you are an operator or a big portal, you do it on your own 10:38:09 ... or take WALL as a basis and extend 10:38:35 q? 10:38:50 jose: how about pagination? CSS? 10:39:00 Luca: that's a feature that should be added in the future 10:39:33 ... on the other side, picking different CSS's, I thought about it, but never made it, because I think there are other ways to do it and not bind it to WALL and WURFL 10:39:47 ... JSTL gives you all the tool you need, for example 10:40:11 Jose: maintaining a lot of if, then can be a pain 10:40:22 Luca: correct, but WALL already takes away a lot of the complexity 10:40:27 Rotan: ok, thank you Luca 10:41:14 ... WALL is not so different from the DISelect features 10:41:24 Topic: open Debate 10:41:46 Rotan: after some talks with the participants, I would like to start talking about the nature of the DDR 10:41:59 ... single database? WURFL-like, for example 10:42:42 ... feature requirements seem to actually aim for a framework where more entities can contribute and not a single central service 10:42:54 ... we should think about this framework 10:43:02 ... a federated DB can be a solution 10:43:15 ... provides the feature of multiple contributors 10:43:26 ... also brings conflicts that will need to be resolved 10:43:50 ... would provide the advantage of accessing different points of access, not a single place that might become unreachable 10:44:09 q+ 10:44:21 ... should we talk about this framework or should we limit our discussion about the communication interface? 10:44:52 Stephane: if you want to work specifically on the API, then yes. If you want to consider an entire node, then you will need to talk the entire architecture 10:44:56 q? 10:45:13 DaveS: I think it's important that we agree that we are not going to build a new database within the W3C 10:45:29 ... there are already existing realities such as WURFL that could be a node of this federated system 10:45:52 ... I think we need to clear up that we are not going to collect all the available data and make a new DB 10:45:54 ack luca 10:45:55 Rotan: right 10:46:14 Stephane: are you against the idea of working on the basic idea of working on the basic properties 10:46:30 DaveS: that's a different question. The prototype and the data collection are not the same 10:46:45 ... work on the 5 properties does not mean we are working on the database 10:47:12 ... the 5 properties should be in the next charter. Take WURFL, UAProf, etc and identify these properties 10:47:43 ... We support the idea of feeding an open-source initiative 10:48:04 Bennett: I think we're confusing the vocabulary issue with the creation on the database 10:48:27