See also: IRC log
DKA: Jeff Sonstein from ...
JS: I teach stuff. I talked about One Web and as penance I have to be here (or something like that)
DKA: Tony, ByteMobile
Tony Johansson: work in engineering, putting internet on mobiles.
DKA: Do you see ByteMobile using best practices to present content to devices?
FD: Hope we can now work on practical stuff and not administrivia. Goal is to rework the current draft and present to the WG next week.
DKA: Could we review document before next week's call?
FD: In an ideal case. It will be short...
<Zakim> jo, you wanted to note that I have a FPWD of DDWG API to do by next week too ...
JR: I wanted to note that I have
a FPWD of DDWG API to do by next week too ... so getting out a
draft by Tuesday means I will ahve to actualy work all night
and over the weekend too...
... and more to the point that the format may not be totally perfect as per my usual standards by then
JR: I was lurking. Sounds like there is work going on. There is a regular telecon, a mailing list, and a promising discussion of a number of substantive issues.
DKA: That's my impression too.
DKA: Checker went Beta.
SO: No comments yet since we released - and I haven't had time since then, although there is outstanding work to do
DKA: Was demoed at W3C stand, Mobile World Congress in Barcelona.
FD: Wish there was
... we had some hassles setting up our web interface stuff for demos (The Demonstrator Gods strike again!!)
... most sites checked were not mobileOK, except sevenVal which came back OK.
<DKA> 7val's wikipedia site at wikipedia.7val.com
FD: so only one t-shirt given away
DKA: There was a useful wikipedia
... not just passing teh checker but also received no warnings.
<yeliz> can't access this site http://weblog.200ok.org.au
DKA: There is a registration form - please fill it in.
<francois> Seoul F2F registration
DKA: You need to fill out the registration if you are interested in coming. I am exceited about the mobile wednesday thing
<francois> [Note the questionnaire is mandatory even if one doesn't plan to go there]
DKA: and should help to stimulate dialogue, etc.
s/can't access this site http://weblog.200ok.org.au//
JR: Dan, you haven't actually structured anything yet?
DKA: No, although I saw you had done a lot of great work, I didn't get around to following up yet
<jo> ACTION: Dan to draft an agenda for the Korea F2F by tomorrow [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/21-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-662 - Draft an agenda for the Korea F2F by tomorrow [on Daniel Appelquist - due 2008-02-28].
DKA: My preference is to talk about meaty issues, in particular BP 2 and filling it out with actual stuff. That requires people to come prepared with teh top 5 things they want to see
s/I can access that URL now, thanks \/me//
BS: I have put a bunch of stuff together...
DKA: Hopefully we will have
enough to issue a FPWD
... and we are filling out stuff for MobileOK Pro
JR: There are some pretty solid issues around Content Transformation. So we expect some unanswered questions that it would be good to discuss - https, UA strings, etc...
AC: zakim, who is making noise?
DKA: Cannot attend the suggested date 9-13. Think that means we should change it.
<jo> Pop Ups
JR: Sounds like an excellent time to hold it to me
<edm> Please see Nacho's e-mail re Zaragoza f2f - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-bpwg/2008Feb/0074.html
JR: The poll is only accessible to DDWG - and we can't fix that until Monday. meanwhile, we have to make up our minds in a big hurry.
<jo> Zaragoza Poll
DKA: Looks like 16-20 is the preferred alternate for DDWG
<edm> ... but as Nacho points out all we have for now is what we have now is a pre-reservation for the week of June 9-13 ...
We could send an email poll toget at least an idae before Monday
FD: We could set up a secon poll for this group
<scribe> ACTION: Francois to set up a poll for BPWG due in one hour [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/21-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]
<scribe> ACTION: Francois set up a poll for BPWG due in one hour [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/21-bpwg-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - Francois
<francois> ACTION: Daoust set up a poll for BPWG due in one hour [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/21-bpwg-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-663 - Set up a poll for BPWG due in one hour [on François Daoust - due 2008-02-28].
<achuter> jo said in minutes last week "resume doc review at POP_UPs next time]"
FD after the call: See the end of the minutes for the duplicated questionnaire's URI.
<jo> Pop Ups
JR: We got to Pop-ups last time, let's resume from there
AC: Pop-ups are a problem for people who are not seeing the whole screen, or not sure what is going on and end up closing the whole browser instead of just spare windows
JR: Think this is fine
BS: So pop-ups should not be used?
AC: You need to tell the user if
you are going to open a popup
... following the mobile BP means not using them, and tra-la
... It is probably difficult for this group to comment on WCAG since almost nobody knows it here...
DKA: There is no WCAG statement for "provide defaults"?
[I agree that this is a WCAG problem. There was something related in WCAG 1, but ...]
JR: Since it is not clearly
testable, it is not in WCAG. In most cases we find that Mobile
BP helps accessibility even when it makes no difference to WCAG
2 compliance (the story is different for WCAG 1)
... we should limit our comments to things that are unclear or incomplete
AC: REDIRECTIONS - confuses people because they don't there has been a redirect, or because they have not been able to read what was there before it changed
CMN: Thinks this is fine
CMN: This one is fine
AC: users with reading difficulties can have trouble scrolling around and staying oriented. multiple-direction scroll increases the load on people with limited input capability
[it also helps disorient people using serious zoom without fit-to-width]
JR: Structure - this gives you WCAG compliance. But this isn't intended only to cover heading structure in BP. Seems good to me.
DKA: Could we mark out the practices that do contribute to compliance with an icon?
AC: The link shows the correspondence...
JR: Style sheets...
<jo> Scribe: Jo
<scribe> scribenick: jo
AC: this helps people who don't see the effects of style sheets etc.
<yeliz> yeliz, unmute me
dka: that cover sytle sheets use too?
ac: no but the benefits are similar
yeliz: might be useful to detail how this helps
dka: that level of detail could get us into trouble
ac: it would be nice to give example but would be a lot of work
yeliz: in some cases you do give some examples so might be an idea to do so here
dka: yeliz do you want to contribute some examples
<jeffs> perhaps RIT can find a way to be helpful with building/testing examples
<scribe> ACTION: Yeliz to provide some examples to put into the document - specifically on STYLE_SHEET_SUPPORT [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/21-bpwg-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-664 - Provide some examples to put into the document - specifically on STYLE_SHEET_SUPPORT [on Yeliz Yesilada - due 2008-02-28].
jeffs: we can talk offline on what we can supply by way of examples
<yeliz> yeliz, mute me
<scribe> ACTION: chuter to talk to Jeffs about what support they can provide on examples [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/21-bpwg-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-665 - Talk to Jeffs about what support they can provide on examples [on Alan Chuter - due 2008-02-28].
dka: I have a problem with nomenclature - possibly covered, partially covered and possibly/partially covered
ac: it is intentional but may not be correct
dka: think that will be confusing to readers
ac: partially is about scope possibly is about whether it will or note
<yeliz> I think it would be good to define them
ac: think they should be defined somewhere
dka: why don't you put in a pra in the intro to define that
jo: resume from TAB_ORDER next time
bryan: we need to think about
whether they make sense for mobility
... e.g. pop ups will be in line and other that will be conflicting
jo: yes this will be of importance when we are looking at WCAG to BP corresponding
ac: my comment was about whether mobile devices do actually support switching of style sheet
<chaals> [Yes Alan, at least some do
<Zakim> Kai, you wanted to ask about mobileOK Pro report
<Kai> Kai: Here is some more information, for your perusal, from the mail I had sent to the list..
<Kai> - The tests have been reworked by the TF
<Kai> - I am currently in the process of casting the document into an editor's draft
<Kai> - Due to eskalations here at work I am unable to deliver the first draft today.
<Kai> Hopefully by early next week I will be able to do so.
<Kai> - Charter has been amended and submitted to WG for approval
<Kai> - Website for TF has been created
<Kai> - Access for me as Editor and Author is being dealt with by Francois (I would appreciate some information to progress)
<Kai> - Telco has been created and the first one held yesterday
<Kai> Open points:
<Kai> There is a F2F meeting March 19th at the Vodafone Offices at 80 Strand, London Begin 9 am End ca. 4-6 pm
<chaals> s/AC: Yes/[Yes Alan/
Bryan: I sent out a number of
firestarter emails on the sections that are in the requirements
... a number of responses and some specific suggestions
... I will get these into a draft
... for Seoul, have we got the scope right?
dka: I was hoping we could have
discussion on scope
... on this call to help refine the scope
... Jo posted on ACTION-660 Reprise
<francois> ScribeNick: francois
DKA: my intention is to get to a resolution re the scope of the BP2
Jo: One of the things that
strikes me is that we don't have in the document a clear
definition of what a web application is and what it isn't
... we did discuss that in Boston
... about the browser sandbox or not
... I think we should take some time to define precisely a web application
Bryan: there is a scope section which does define, based on November talks, a web application
<Kai> I like it
<Bryan> BP2 extends the focus to Web applications generally, which means an application that is accessed and presented via Web technologies.
<srowen> I think it can be sharpened to mention HTTP, an (X)HTML
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: A "Mobile Web Application" shall be defined as an application that runs inside the browser on a mobile device. Such applications often make use of scripting, CSS, and Dom manipulation.
<jo> 2 Scope
Jo: is Chatzilla a mobile web application?
Bryan: when you say "inside the browser"... Browser technologies in general are used outside the browser
DKA: Joost is a good example of a
desktop web application
... but I think that's out of scope
Jo: I do not think this is a
... I don't think it's a sharp enough definition
<Kai> From Wikipedia: In software engineering, a Web application or webapp is an application that is accessed via Web over a network such as the Internet or an intranet.
<Kai> It has been suggested that Browser application be merged into this article or section.
Jeff: originally in the browser context but now not in the browser context anymore
<jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: WE should define a specific set of criteria that need to be fulfilled to be a Mobile Web Application
<jeffs> agree w srowen suggestion above
Sean: I think we need to make clear we're targetting xml over HTTP, mobile devices, and scripting
<srowen> Dan -- you mentioned the browser, which I don't think is necessary (per Messr. Sullivan), and didn't mention HTTP or HTML, which seems vital
<chaals> [I don't see that w should be targetting things specifically for mobile devices rather than web, just things that are designed to work well for mobile devices as part of teh web]
<Kai> [I agree with Chaals. Where is One Web?]
Bryan: we should separate web applications and content type
<srowen> what on earth are we going to talk about that *isn't* related to HTTP and HTML
Bryan: I would not limit the BP
to XML, XHTML, HTML
... we should not limit our scope to them
<jo> Actionscript ...
<srowen> give me an example of a legitimate existing practice related to advanced mobile devices that does not relate to the technologies listed so far
DKA: we should focus on existing web technologies
<srowen> if we can't, then I don't see what the problem is with being specific and clear about what we are, in reality, talking about anyway
+1 to srowen remarks
<edm> how about sticking to what is enabled by the existing technologies - including specifically XHTML/HTML, CSS, DOM, ECMAscript, AJAX, SVG?
Jo: I think we're going to end up in circles if we don't come up with something precise
<DKA> I'm back
DKA: we should build on the Web as a platform
Jo: That would seem to encompass Java applets
<edm> +1 to focusing on the web as a platform - and perhaps browsers as application containers?
<Zakim> jo, you wanted to mention SVG, XML, the use of XMLHTTP interfaces
DKA: it should be about using web technologies without plugins
Bryan: In general, regardless of
where the application runs, if it operates as a browser, then
it is a browser, and is under the scope
... The applications that use HTTP as a transport and windows fall in the scope.
<srowen> Agree, don't care whether we're talking about user agents based on MIDP or Symbian or ham sandwiches. But we seem to be talking about HTML/CSS/HTTP user agents, so let's say that much. Don't say "browser" if you don't want, I agree that is not necessary.
Bryan: We're really talking about
... of web applications
... that's the charter I believe
<Zakim> Kai, you wanted to say that web applications include services that are exposed via web technologies. If they are intended for mobile usage they are game
Kai: web applications are
something that offer a service.
... I like Bryan's initial definition
... I don't find it too general
<Zakim> jo, you wanted to say the plugin definition excludes SVG and a bunch of other stuff that we would want to include and to wonder if we are talking about applications that are based
<srowen> Final remark: let's start by listing out best practices. I posted 5-6 to the list. At the end of the day, if we find that the real, good practices we can mention concern only HTTP/HTML/etc. then we can comfortably state that *that* is what we are talking about. Sure, let's not decide that a priori if that is unpalatable.
Jo: I'm wondering whether we're talking about applications that are using the DOM
DKA: that makes sense
... is there a W3C definition that we could use?
... Let's have the topic back in next week's call
<Zakim> francois, you wanted to talk about Zaragoza questionnaire once you're done Dan
DKA: I will create an issue and then we can discuss it on the mailing-list
-> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/37584/BPWGDDWGF2FZARAGOZA/ Zaragoza F2F