IRC log of bpwg on 2007-06-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

08:18:28 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #bpwg
08:18:28 [RRSAgent]
logging to
08:18:48 [dom]
Meeting: mobileOK ref implementation F2F, day 2
08:18:52 [dom]
Chair: Sean
08:19:06 [nacho]
nacho has joined #bpwg
08:19:09 [dom]
Present: Abel, Miguel, Ignacio, Sean, Dom, Roland, Ruadhan
08:19:16 [dom]
08:19:21 [dom]
zakim, agenda?
08:19:21 [Zakim]
I see 9 items remaining on the agenda:
08:19:22 [Zakim]
1. error reporting, error codes and I18N [from dom]
08:19:24 [Zakim]
2. test suites, and acceptance criteria, beta period [from dom]
08:19:27 [Zakim]
4. issues with XSLT Framework, standardization of output format [from dom]
08:19:29 [Zakim]
5. CSS Library [from dom]
08:19:30 [Zakim]
6. Exceptions hierarchy [from dom]
08:19:32 [Zakim]
7. Cacheing behavior [from dom]
08:19:33 [Zakim]
8. Documentation: schemas, introduction, ... [from from Jo via dom]
08:19:34 [Zakim]
9. setting up configuration framework (e.g. for language setting, authentication, ...) [from dom]
08:19:37 [Zakim]
10. audit/estimate to completion [from dom]
08:19:54 [dom]
-> Minutes of Day 1 (June 12)
08:22:00 [roland]
roland has joined #bpwg
08:24:07 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
08:34:23 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
08:44:37 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
08:46:44 [jo]
jo has joined #bpwg
08:51:24 [dom]
RRSAgent, make log public
08:51:30 [dom]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
08:51:30 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate dom
08:54:52 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
08:57:21 [miguel]
miguel has joined #bpwg
08:57:38 [abel]
abel has joined #bpwg
09:05:07 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
09:10:56 [dom]
-> Third Party study from CTIC guys
09:12:51 [dom]
(the latest version of that document on Google Docs is dated June 12)
09:14:12 [dom]
ScribeNick: dom
09:14:23 [dom]
Topic: Using errors reported from other tools
09:14:46 [dom]
Sean: I think we need to take an ad-hoc approach, do our best with what the tools provide, and if they don't, find our ways around
09:15:22 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
09:15:37 [dom]
Abel: one of the problems we identified is that most of these tools don't provide error codes
09:15:57 [dom]
... for instance, the XHTML module in JHove only outputs a message and a location
09:16:09 [dom]
... the image module provides a message and a bytes offset
09:16:45 [dom]
Sean: I think it's fine for us to parse the error messages; it's ugly, but probably shortest way forward
09:16:55 [dom]
... would be better if they provided a better API
09:18:02 [dom]
Miguel: the difficulty will be to identify all the possible messages
09:18:32 [dom]
... in Jhove, they are hardcoded in the source itself, not even in property files
09:19:43 [dom]
... and of course, the messages are parametrized (e.g. to include the name of the element that triggered the validity error)
09:19:59 [dom]
Jo: if we have to review all the errors triggering code, we may as well fix it!
09:21:36 [dom]
Sean: one way to get around that is simply to include the messages that Jhove sends to us in the error messages we send back to the user
09:21:44 [dom]
Dom: but that's a killer in terms of I18N
09:21:51 [dom]
Sean: right, that's the big downside
09:21:56 [ruadhan]
ruadhan has joined #bpwg
09:22:10 [dom]
... but I would still favor just doing it
09:22:38 [dom]
jo: I guess the question is whether perfect error reporting is part of our requirements or not
09:23:16 [dom]
... we need to strike a balance between what we would like to achieve, what we need to achieve and what we can achieve in a reasonable amount of time
09:25:02 [dom]
Sean: I think we should focus on what we have to do first
09:25:37 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
09:26:02 [dom]
Jo: whatever we decide, we just need to make clear whatever the restrictions our first version will have
09:26:59 [dom]
... too bad libraries don't handle this well
09:27:31 [dom]
Dom: I note *our* library will have exactly this same problem given the decision we took yesterday (non-parametrized error messages)
09:28:37 [dom]
Sean: I think we should proceed with the simple solution for now, and fix it later
09:28:41 [dom]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
09:28:41 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate dom
09:31:45 [dom]
[discussions on whether we should favor a pragmatic vs esthetical approach]
09:33:03 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #bpwg
09:34:22 [dom]
Dom: what you guys are doing in your tools?
09:34:41 [dom]
... The checker just sends back the messages the XML validation library produces
09:34:45 [dom]
Ruadhan: same for us
09:35:09 [dom]
Miguel: in TAW, we had to hack around the XML validation to get translated messages
09:35:21 [dom]
... The CSS library allowed for localization, so we didn't have the same problem
09:35:52 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
09:36:05 [dom]
Sean: let's have a better system as our goal for version 1.0, but move forward with the simple version now
09:36:27 [dom]
Miguel: if so, we should probably separate the data in the results
09:36:49 [dom]
... so that it's clear that some part of the messages aren't produced by our library
09:37:44 [dom]
Sean: sounds good, indeed
09:38:28 [dom]
... so we amend the results document as we discussed yesterday to create an additional element (e.g. "details") to include third party library messages
09:38:55 [dom]
q+ to propose that we have somewhere a reference results document so that we can now at any time the expected structure of the results doc
09:40:29 [dom]
ack dom
09:40:29 [Zakim]
dom, you wanted to propose that we have somewhere a reference results document so that we can now at any time the expected structure of the results doc
09:40:55 [dom]
Sean: point taken; I guess the reference would be what is in the test suite
09:43:40 [dom]
Jo: random thought of the day: should the individual test reported by the XSLTs have a specific version number attached?
09:43:45 [dom]
dom: don't think that's necessary
09:44:01 [dom]
... let's wait until we would actually need it
09:44:43 [dom]
Jo: also, we need to look at how to report errors from the library
09:44:53 [dom]
... e.g. out of memory errors
09:45:14 [dom]
Sean: don't think that needs to be part of the results document
09:45:22 [dom]
... just throw an exception
09:45:36 [dom]
Jo: I think the results document should give some indication of this
09:45:43 [dom]
... e.g. with a CannotTell
09:46:08 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
09:47:49 [dom]
Dom: I think both approach are reasonable
09:48:03 [dom]
... the only question is whether exceptions get handled in or out of the library
09:50:30 [dom]
... I think the difference is whether you consider the API to be the Java API or the XML API
09:50:39 [dom]
... don't think we've ever made a clear decision on this
09:51:21 [dom]
Jo:: we should probably move on for now, but we'll need to get back to this
09:52:11 [dom]
Ruadhan: if the results document is a report, it should always report whether a test passed or failed, it can't be silent on it
09:56:23 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
09:57:32 [dom]
dom: if we can solve this with just another wrapper to catch exceptions, it's probably worth keeping the exceptions, as this gives us the best of the two worlds
09:57:35 [dom]
sean: doesn't seem very clean
10:03:39 [dom]
dom: I say, let's keep the Java API clean, and how exceptions are handled can be decided later on, or even by a wrapper library should the need arise
10:03:55 [dom]
sean: still not convinced, but we should move on
10:06:38 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
10:16:53 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
10:27:08 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
10:32:52 [dom]
zakim, close agendum 1
10:32:52 [Zakim]
agendum 1, error reporting, error codes and I18N, closed
10:32:53 [Zakim]
I see 8 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
10:32:54 [Zakim]
2. test suites, and acceptance criteria, beta period [from dom]
10:32:58 [dom]
Zakim, next agendum
10:32:58 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "test suites, and acceptance criteria, beta period" taken up [from dom]
10:33:28 [dom]
Sean: we already have a set of unit tests, which hopefully we can use to convince the BPWG that we do indeed implement mobileOK Basic
10:34:01 [dom]
Jo: one of the questions is what part of the results document constitute a proof that your checker is indeed a mobileOK checker
10:34:15 [dom]
Sean: clearly the error messages shouldn't required
10:34:35 [dom]
... I guess it should be that you do report the right errors
10:36:34 [dom]
[discussions on protecting mobileOK checker through test suite]
10:36:42 [dom]
Jo: still, we need to make sure our test suite is complete
10:36:58 [dom]
Sean: I say we add tests as needed
10:37:23 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
10:38:02 [dom]
Jo: we want to keep in mind that the test suite will need to be versioned
10:38:08 [dom]
zakim, close this agendum
10:38:08 [Zakim]
agendum 2 closed
10:38:09 [Zakim]
I see 7 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
10:38:10 [Zakim]
4. issues with XSLT Framework, standardization of output format [from dom]
10:38:29 [dom]
Zakim, close agendum 4
10:38:29 [Zakim]
agendum 4, issues with XSLT Framework, standardization of output format, closed
10:38:31 [Zakim]
I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
10:38:32 [Zakim]
5. CSS Library [from dom]
10:38:40 [dom]
zakim, take up agendum 6
10:38:40 [Zakim]
agendum 6. "Exceptions hierarchy" taken up [from dom]
10:38:52 [dom]
Abel: currently we only have one type of Exception
10:39:04 [dom]
... we could have two kinds of Exceptions
10:39:57 [dom]
... to distinguish Fatal Errors (e.g. config file not found) vs exceptions raised in the test execution (e.g. exception raised by Jhove)
10:40:15 [dom]
... (this relates to our earlier discussion on error reporting)
10:41:25 [dom]
Sean: so the question is whether we want to subclass TestException
10:41:52 [dom]
... my take is someone using our code wouldn't care about what type of the exception
10:42:08 [dom]
... I guess we could chain exceptions if we do want a hierarchy
10:42:24 [dom]
... I don't oppose having a hierarchy if there is a use case for that
10:42:57 [dom]
Abel: if one test failed because of of a failure of a third party, what is the result?
10:43:07 [dom]
Sean: that's indeed the question we just discussed
10:43:12 [dom]
... do we report it or not?
10:44:30 [dom]
... I guess Dom and Jo argued for outputting a minimal results document with a CannotTell message
10:44:52 [dom]
dom: I think we were actually asking for a document as complete as possible (i.e. including the results that were indeed processed)
10:45:07 [dom]
... and also some information as to why one or more of the tests couldn't be run
10:45:18 [dom]
Nacho: not sure we need a cannot tell, since it's not defined in mobileOK
10:45:25 [dom]
... a warning should probably be enough
10:46:07 [dom]
Sean: I still think we should get back to that later
10:47:38 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
10:48:43 [dom]
... if we keep exceptions, I think the current flat exception space is ok, although I'm open to expand it if use cases suggest it
10:49:04 [dom]
... if we report cannottell outcomes, I don't think we should raise exceptions at all
10:49:09 [dom]
Zakim, close this agendum
10:49:09 [Zakim]
agendum 6 closed
10:49:10 [Zakim]
I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
10:49:11 [Zakim]
5. CSS Library [from dom]
10:49:12 [dom]
zakim, next agendum
10:49:12 [Zakim]
agendum 5. "CSS Library" taken up [from dom]
10:49:27 [dom]
Nacho: I think we should decide what library to use
10:49:44 [dom]
Sean: so, in our choices, one was good at syntax parsing, and the other @@@
10:50:10 [dom]
Miguel: another point to consider is how to turn the CSS style sheet into XML if we want to process it through XSLT
10:50:35 [dom]
Jo: I'm not quite sure what we should do here
10:50:59 [dom]
... I'm tempted to only integrate the error reports from the library in the moki document instead
10:51:21 [dom]
... the library that turns CSS into XML has too many flaws for our own use
10:51:47 [dom]
... and it would probably be out of our scope to develop such a library at this point
10:51:59 [dom]
... (although it would certainly be nice to be able to do so)
10:53:35 [dom]
... The best option is probably to with the SAX CSS parser, since it's the most likely to work for our purposes
10:54:05 [dom]
Sean: so we need to both validate and analyse the style sheets
10:54:19 [dom]
... is one library enough or do we need two for that?
10:54:50 [dom]
Miguel: the SAX parser can only be used for analysis of the style sheet
10:55:08 [dom]
... the only library I know to validate a style sheet against CSS 1 is the W3C CSS Validator
10:56:03 [dom]
Dom: another option is to use the SOAP interface for the CSS Validator
10:56:21 [dom]
... (although it prevents to use our system as an all-in-one package)
10:56:37 [dom]
Sean: I'd rather keep it in all-in-one
10:57:12 [dom]
... so can we use the css validator code for our purposes?
10:57:26 [dom]
Miguel: yes; the only problem is that it is a bit slow
10:57:41 [dom]
Nacho: I think it's probably good enough for our first version of the checker
10:57:53 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
10:58:19 [dom]
Jo: this raises the point that we should have a wrapper for our validation code
10:58:35 [dom]
... so that it's easier to swap validators if we choose to
10:59:12 [dom]
... identifying a common interface around these validators would be a good way to identify what we want out of these validators anyway
10:59:19 [dom]
... our current code is ugly
10:59:32 [dom]
Sean: I'm personally fine with binding directly to the library
10:59:41 [dom]
... it also obscures less the code
10:59:51 [dom]
... and it allows a greater use of the underlying API
11:00:01 [dom]
Jo: true... probably a matter of taste
11:00:40 [dom]
Sean: also, we're already using well-defined API (SAX, XML validation, etc)
11:01:00 [dom]
... and if we were to change a validator, I'm not sure an abstract API would actually save us so much time
11:01:13 [dom]
Jo: I don't disagree with you
11:02:29 [dom]
... it would certainly be helpful to have a common interface for validators, that said
11:02:47 [dom]
dom: note that the W3C Unicorn project has more or less defined such an API, if you're interested
11:03:15 [dom]
Jo: sounds interesting; anyway, it sounds like we're not going to proceed that way for the time being
11:03:27 [dom]
Sean: here is what I think we should do:
11:03:41 [dom]
... we should remove the JXCSS thingy I had started
11:03:54 [dom]
... we use the W3C CSS validator for validation
11:04:05 [dom]
... and SAC for the actual test implementation
11:04:34 [dom]
Jo: one of the difficulties is to deal with inline CSS
11:04:42 [dom]
Sean: do we allow the style attribute?
11:05:03 [dom]
Dom: we do
11:05:13 [dom]
Sean: so that will need to be implemented
11:05:37 [dom]
... fortunately, our tests on CSS are fairly simple (e.g. don't use "px")
11:07:03 [dom]
ACTION: Ignacio to work with Miguel and Abel to implement the CSS stuff (removing JXCSS, implement validation, and use SAC for test implementation)
11:07:03 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-515 - Work with Miguel and Abel to implement the CSS stuff (removing JXCSS, implement validation, and use SAC for test implementation) [on Ignacio Marn - due 2007-06-20].
11:08:08 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
11:08:51 [dom]
Jo: I still think we should keep as a goal to have at some point an CSS-in-XML implementation in moki
11:09:11 [dom]
Dom: how hard would it be to use SAC to generate such a thing? should be relatively straightforward, isn't it?
11:10:08 [dom]
ACTION: Jo to evaluate how hard it would be to produce XML out of CSS stylesheets using SAC
11:10:08 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-516 - Evaluate how hard it would be to produce XML out of CSS stylesheets using SAC [on Jo Rabin - due 2007-06-20].
11:10:21 [dom]
zakim, close this agendum
11:10:21 [Zakim]
agendum 5 closed
11:10:22 [Zakim]
I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
11:10:23 [Zakim]
7. Cacheing behavior [from dom]
11:10:59 [dom]
Zakim, next agendum
11:10:59 [Zakim]
agendum 7. "Cacheing behavior" taken up [from dom]
11:11:15 [dom]
Dom: the question is what caching should our library do?
11:11:40 [dom]
Jo: indeed, what do we cache and under what circumstances? esp. given what we discovered yesterday re caching and URIs
11:14:10 [dom]
dom: two caching questions: keeping a list of URIs already downloaded in the given request vs keeping a resource that was downloaded for a previous analysis so that you don't have to do it again
11:14:23 [dom]
Jo: I think we shouldn't do the latter, and should do the former
11:16:37 [dom]
... we also need to discuss what to do with regard to URIs given our discovery of yesterday
11:17:12 [dom]
Dom: [different cases of what browsers do in terms of canonicalization]
11:17:37 [dom]
Sean: think we should keep it simple (i.e. simple string comparison), and that should be pretty close to what current browsers do
11:17:48 [dom]
... unlikely to happen very often anyway
11:18:05 [dom]
Dom: only thing we have to do for sure is making URIs absolute
11:18:23 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
11:18:40 [dom]
Ruadhan: I'm willing to take an action item to implement this
11:20:20 [dom]
ACTION: Ruadhan to look at implementing the in-memory caching per URIs
11:20:20 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - Ruadhan
11:20:37 [dom]
ACTION: Jo to annoy Ruadhan until he implements the in-memory caching per URIs
11:20:37 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-517 - Annoy Ruadhan until he implements the in-memory caching per URIs [on Jo Rabin - due 2007-06-20].
11:22:07 [dom]
zakim, close this agendum
11:22:07 [Zakim]
agendum 7 closed
11:22:08 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
11:22:10 [Zakim]
8. Documentation: schemas, introduction, ... [from from Jo via dom]
11:23:16 [miguel]
miguel has left #bpwg
11:28:38 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
11:38:53 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
11:49:08 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
11:59:23 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
12:09:38 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
12:19:53 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
12:21:28 [miguel]
miguel has joined #bpwg
12:30:08 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
12:40:23 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
12:44:56 [dom]
"If a Mobile Web site adapts in the forest and no user agents are there, is it OK?" -- DanA
12:49:35 [dom]
Zakim, next agendum
12:49:35 [Zakim]
agendum 8. "Documentation: schemas, introduction, ..." taken up [from from Jo]
12:49:59 [dom]
ScribeNick: ruadhan
12:50:38 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
12:50:48 [ruadhan]
sean concerns what we are going to provide in end product
12:50:52 [ruadhan]
jo: and schemas
12:51:57 [ruadhan]
Sean: introduction, overview
12:52:32 [ruadhan]
Jo: talked about yesterday
12:52:59 [ruadhan]
... don't consider ouseleves finished until we have proivided certain amount of documentation we need to decide what this is
12:53:04 [ruadhan]
12:53:13 [ruadhan]
... bug tracking?
12:53:33 [ruadhan]
Dom: lets use w3c bugzilla
12:53:55 [ruadhan]
... don't like bugzilla necessarily, we could use tacker
12:54:11 [ruadhan]
Roland: need docs in xslt?
12:54:34 [ruadhan]
Sean: we should have comments in source also
12:54:56 [ruadhan]
Sean: what else do we need?
12:55:23 [ruadhan]
Jo: nacho mentioned developer guide
12:56:21 [ruadhan]
Sean: we should take resolution not to finish until documentation is finished
12:56:54 [ruadhan]
Jo: Problem with frameworks can be lack of documentation
12:57:06 [ruadhan]
Sean: thats what developer guide will be about
12:57:12 [ruadhan]
... schema can be done later
12:57:18 [ruadhan]
Jo: worth doing now
12:58:01 [ruadhan]
Sean: will take user guide, de. guide,
12:58:12 [ruadhan]
... we all need to do javadoc and comments
12:58:24 [ruadhan]
... Jo will take schema and homepage
12:58:44 [ruadhan]
nacho: i will take dev guide and user guide
12:59:16 [ruadhan]
Jo: started homepage in adhoc way -
12:59:33 [ruadhan]
... if anyone wants to contribute, feel free, just need write access
12:59:54 [ruadhan]
Sean: homepage is real nice
13:00:03 [ruadhan]
... need a mobile-friendly version
13:00:15 [ruadhan]
Jo: might be ok
13:00:19 [ruadhan]
Sean: anything else?
13:00:30 [dom]
zakim, close this agendum
13:00:32 [Zakim]
agendum 8 closed
13:00:33 [Zakim]
I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
13:00:34 [Zakim]
9. setting up configuration framework (e.g. for language setting, authentication, ...) [from dom]
13:00:37 [dom]
zakim, next agendum
13:00:37 [Zakim]
agendum 9. "setting up configuration framework (e.g. for language setting, authentication, ...)" taken up [from dom]
13:00:53 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
13:01:32 [ruadhan]
miguel: what about authentication parameters, locale...
13:02:00 [ruadhan]
Sean: authentication mentioned somewhere, how do we support?
13:02:12 [ruadhan]
Jo: I would like to have some minor configuration options
13:02:37 [ruadhan]
... e.g. doing our own redirection handling, but might be nice to use standard commons redirection
13:02:49 [ruadhan]
Sean: so theres a class of development only options
13:03:08 [ruadhan]
... my concern is that mobileOK should mean one thing and be one thing
13:03:14 [ruadhan]
... its mobileOk or not
13:03:58 [ruadhan]
Nacho: what about validating local doc that you can upload instead of just passing URL
13:04:06 [ruadhan]
Jo: some kind of desktop integration would be nice
13:04:24 [ruadhan]
sean: configure a local directory that acts as a pseudo webserver
13:05:01 [ruadhan]
... right now we already have something like this in the code
13:05:22 [ruadhan]
... test docs that have a document specifying test headers and starts tomcat
13:05:33 [ruadhan]
... might be nice to be able to test localhost
13:06:37 [ruadhan]
Jo: more will come out but we just need a single approach
13:06:51 [ruadhan]
Sean: i can name many mechanisms:
13:07:10 [ruadhan]
... config file, xml or properties, command line / env variables
13:07:32 [ruadhan]
Nacho: verbosity level
13:07:43 [ruadhan]
Sean: of log statemts of code?
13:08:09 [ruadhan]
Nacho: granularity of results document
13:08:28 [ruadhan]
Sean: the results doc should be the same all the time for consistency
13:08:42 [ruadhan]
... but maybe we do want a quick mode: just passes and fails
13:09:11 [ruadhan]
Nacho: could be quicker if the framework is not figuring out lines and cols etc.
13:09:32 [ruadhan]
... was thinking about results doc to save time in processing
13:09:45 [ruadhan]
Sean: how should we store this stuff
13:10:17 [ruadhan]
Roland: set paramaters in web interface - quick mode or developer mode
13:11:08 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
13:11:16 [ruadhan]
Roland: some config params can be set by user, there are options per request and per the whole thing
13:11:32 [ruadhan]
Sean: config file appropriate for globale options
13:11:46 [ruadhan]
... per request, maybe a java class
13:12:02 [ruadhan]
Jo: how do we make globally accessible
13:12:30 [ruadhan]
Sean: within the code we could use some kind of singleton, get an instance of the congiuration object
13:12:53 [ruadhan]
... or configuration could live in an object within the tester
13:13:01 [ruadhan]
Jo: but how to access it
13:13:11 [ruadhan]
Sean: yeah, without passing it all over the place
13:13:27 [ruadhan]
... its doable...
13:13:48 [ruadhan]
Jo: i don't care how its done, is this something someone can take on?
13:14:01 [ruadhan]
... and what is our approach to logging?
13:14:24 [ruadhan]
Sean: I suggest java.util.logging
13:14:32 [ruadhan]
Jo: many approaches
13:15:09 [ruadhan]
Sean: preference is for java.util.logging, they all pretty much do the same
13:15:11 [dom]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:15:11 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate dom
13:15:39 [ruadhan]
Sean: when to log "fine" "info" "warn"
13:15:59 [ruadhan]
... recap: we've identified enought that we need a mechanism
13:16:19 [ruadhan]
... some of these features for development more than anything
13:16:25 [ruadhan]
... and what about the global config
13:16:34 [ruadhan]
... it think i can solve the global problem
13:16:56 [ruadhan]
... last question is how do we get the global options in, config fuile, command line options?
13:17:09 [ruadhan]
... I'm happy to do this
13:17:28 [ruadhan]
... global config in a file, and a class encapsulating the options
13:17:40 [ruadhan]
... lets talk about loggin some more later
13:18:08 [ruadhan]
... can use our judgement about when to log fine, warn, info etc.
13:18:21 [ruadhan]
... Any other requirement?
13:19:14 [nacho]
tendre que llamar lebo jiji
13:19:19 [nacho]
ooops, sorry
13:20:07 [ruadhan]
migeul: what about example when a page includes a reference to an image with size 1MB
13:20:16 [ruadhan]
... do we download it, or do we set a limit?
13:20:35 [ruadhan]
Sean: yeah what about files that are 10MB, or 100MB
13:20:36 [nacho]
s/tendre que llamar lebo jiji//
13:20:45 [nacho]
s/oops, sorry//
13:20:46 [ruadhan]
Jo: yes this has been on my mind
13:21:05 [ruadhan]
... the fact that we build a DOM in the first place is fundamental and at the heart of this issue
13:21:21 [ruadhan]
Sean: one solution is to
13:21:23 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
13:21:39 [ruadhan]
... in the retrieval is if the doc > 1MB just cut if off and call a network error
13:21:50 [ruadhan]
.. just to protect against malicious attacks
13:22:01 [ruadhan]
Roland: do we limit number of resources?
13:22:17 [ruadhan]
Nacho: we should have some hacking session, we try to break it
13:22:29 [ruadhan]
Sean: what do you guys do?
13:22:58 [ruadhan]
Dom: in checker there is a limit of number of redirects of 5
13:23:41 [ruadhan]
... checker doesn't follow link to itself
13:24:04 [ruadhan]
... Can only run it on its homepage
13:24:13 [ruadhan]
ruadhan: same for
13:24:45 [ruadhan]
Dom: i limit number of links
13:25:07 [ruadhan]
... i don't limit the size of resources
13:25:19 [ruadhan]
Jo: need to both count the redirects and check they are not circular
13:25:52 [ruadhan]
Sean: lets call it "safety hazards"
13:26:01 [ruadhan]
... redirects
13:26:05 [ruadhan]
... #links
13:26:12 [ruadhan]
... resource size (DOM, images)
13:26:18 [ruadhan]
... links to self
13:26:31 [ruadhan]
... stalled requests, timeouts
13:26:46 [ruadhan]
Jo: what about if someone is using you as a proxy for DOS attacks
13:28:53 [ruadhan]
migeul: if someone uses us as DoS, its not efficient enough as its not a fast process
13:29:24 [ruadhan]
Sean: lets revisit this at next F2F
13:31:05 [dom]
zakim, close this agendum
13:31:05 [Zakim]
agendum 9 closed
13:31:06 [Zakim]
I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
13:31:08 [Zakim]
10. audit/estimate to completion [from dom]
13:31:10 [dom]
zakim, next
13:31:10 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'next', dom
13:31:12 [dom]
zakim, next agendum
13:31:12 [Zakim]
agendum 10. "audit/estimate to completion" taken up [from dom]
13:31:20 [ruadhan]
Sean: ok, where are we?
13:31:33 [ruadhan]
... the goal is to get to something that looks like an alpha in early July
13:31:38 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
13:31:55 [ruadhan]
... what do we need to sort out in the next 4 weeks
13:32:33 [ruadhan]
Sean: lets recap the actions
13:33:28 [ruadhan]
Jo: css stuff needs to be done urgently
13:38:43 [ruadhan]
Sean: actions 505 to 508 don't seem critical
13:39:23 [ruadhan]
Jo: probably need a written document saying "yes its ok for me to contribute"
13:41:46 [ruadhan]
Sean: action-510 (multtiple results per test is critical)
13:41:53 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
13:42:21 [ruadhan]
... action-511 is critical (research annotatsion to DOM for line and col)
13:43:51 [ruadhan]
... action-512 - should figure this out soon (line & col from xpath)
13:44:12 [ruadhan]
... action-513 - critical also (character encoding thingy)
13:44:50 [ruadhan]
... my intern & I will take this one
13:45:39 [ruadhan]
... action-514 needs to be done soon (implement results and encode in EARL if poss)
13:46:07 [ruadhan]
Jo: action-516 needs to happen before 515 (both about css...)
13:50:01 [ruadhan]
Jo: do we need ownership of portions of code
13:50:45 [dom]
[I just plugged tracker so that it will also watch mail sent to public-mobileok-checker, so that we get e.g. action items referenced from the Web interface]
13:50:51 [ruadhan]
Sean: was hoping that these things would be done as needed
13:51:12 [ruadhan]
... e.g. if you need something in moki you would add it
13:51:59 [ruadhan]
... on target
13:52:08 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
13:52:36 [ruadhan]
dom: one question is which test do i take to implement?
13:52:49 [abel]
13:53:28 [ruadhan]
Roland: i have my name on a number of tests, thats ok!
13:53:46 [ruadhan]
... i'm not so good in Java
13:56:03 [ruadhan]
Sean: i'll work on non-test stuff for now
13:56:07 [dom]
abel, nacho, could you add me to the list of authorized editors for that doc (
13:56:21 [ruadhan]
... alot of work here is writing test-cases...
13:57:08 [ruadhan]
... we'll continue to use google doc to coordinate this
13:58:07 [dom]
[I just got access through Jo, thanks!]
13:59:30 [ruadhan]
Sean: goal by 1st week of july is something that kind of runs, and produces meanigful output
13:59:50 [ruadhan]
Dom: i tried to run tester and used option to output separetly the results - is it just me?
14:00:21 [ruadhan]
Sean: I run the unit tests, and right now, at least one fails
14:00:33 [ruadhan]
Dom: command line runs, but just not doing what I expected
14:01:05 [ruadhan]
Jo: i thought it was working - it was me that put that command line stuff in, so there's a good chance its not working!
14:01:44 [ruadhan]
Sean: that concludes our list of items
14:01:59 [ruadhan]
... is there anything else we haven't talked about?
14:02:07 [dom]
[I just found what I was doing wrong with the command line, sorry for the noise]
14:02:21 [ruadhan]
Jo: might be worth doing a code review
14:02:23 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
14:09:11 [nacho]
ACTION: Ignacio to create a preliminary version of mOK checker User Guide and Developer Guide documents
14:09:11 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-519 - Create a preliminary version of mOK checker User Guide and Developer Guide documents [on Ignacio Marn - due 2007-06-20].
14:12:39 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
14:22:54 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
14:28:10 [dom]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:28:10 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate dom
14:28:31 [dom]
Topic: code reviews
14:30:13 [dom]
-> Code Source in CVS
14:30:46 [dom]
-> the actual Java classes
14:31:25 [dom]
-> the actual Java classes
14:33:09 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
14:43:24 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
14:45:16 [dom]
[Jo, doesn't javadoc reacts to @todo rather than TODO?]
14:46:41 [dom]
14:47:42 [dom]
14:48:29 [dom]
-> ValidationMessage
14:49:24 [dom]
(baed originally on from ruadhan)
14:50:04 [dom]
-> HTTPXHTMLResource
14:53:39 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
14:59:30 [dom]
-> HTTPResource
15:02:03 [dom]
-> HTTPRedirect
15:03:54 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
15:04:06 [dom]
-> Apache commons httpclient.URI
15:05:23 [dom]
-> comparison between apache commons URI and URI
15:06:07 [dom]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:06:07 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate dom
15:07:14 [dom]
-> TestResults
15:09:14 [dom]
-> Preprocessor
15:09:34 [dom]
ScribeNick: dom
15:09:36 [dom]
Jo: XSLT tests developer should pay attention to the normalization of HTTP headers
15:10:45 [dom]
... Preprocess::addHeader uses HeaderParseMethod to take care of the normalization
15:13:10 [dom]
... the categorization of parsing modes made in there is based on the RFC
15:14:09 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
15:15:44 [dom]
-> XSLT used in mobileok ref
15:16:11 [dom]
-> NonTextAlternativesTest.xsl, by Roland
15:17:29 [dom]
-> XSLT Utility libraries
15:17:41 [dom]
Roland: I try to only use match/apply-templates, no for-each
15:17:53 [dom]
... makes it easier to deal with getting serveral failures
15:19:11 [dom]
... for each of my test, I show the actual text of the test
15:20:37 [dom]
... I have a script (moki) that allows me to run the XSLT against the tests in the test directory
15:23:34 [dom]
... [explains some of the utility functions in functions.xsl]
15:24:24 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
15:27:51 [dom]
[discussions on how to present the code-snippet, on a text vs nodes basis, and what can actually be achieved in XSLT]
15:29:05 [roland]
ok, I must get my plain, bye!
15:34:39 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
15:38:19 [matt]
matt has joined #bpwg
15:38:26 [dom]
Proposed dates for September F2F: 4th and 5th in Sophia Antipolis
15:44:54 [dom]
dom has joined #bpwg
15:46:23 [dom]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:46:23 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate dom