13:57:50 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #bpwg
13:57:50 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/04/15-bpwg-irc
13:57:52 <trackbot-ng> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:57:53 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #bpwg
13:57:54 <trackbot-ng> Zakim, this will be BPWG
13:57:55 <trackbot-ng> Meeting: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference
13:57:55 <trackbot-ng> Date: 15 April 2008
13:57:57 <Zakim> ok, trackbot-ng; I see MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
13:58:57 <francois> Chair: francois
13:59:20 <francois> Regrets: rob, bryan, hgerlach, jo, kemp
14:00:11 <Magnus> zakim, code?
14:00:11 <Zakim> the conference code is 2283 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Magnus
14:00:18 <Zakim> MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM has now started
14:00:22 <Zakim> +francois
14:00:25 <Zakim> +Magnus
14:00:43 <francois> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Apr/0025.html
14:00:47 <SeanP> SeanP has joined #bpwg
14:03:57 <Zakim> +SeanP
14:04:41 <andrews> andrews has joined #bpwg
14:05:16 <MartinJ> MartinJ has joined #bpwg
14:06:36 <Zakim> + +0789972aaaa
14:07:02 <andrews> Zakim, aaaa is me
14:07:02 <Zakim> +andrews; got it
14:07:21 <Zakim> + +1.857.362.aabb
14:07:44 <francois> zakim, aabb is MartinJ
14:07:44 <Zakim> +MartinJ; got it
14:08:56 <francois> zakim, who is on the call?
14:08:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see Magnus, francois, SeanP, andrews, MartinJ
14:09:31 <MartinJ> scribe: MartinJ
14:09:38 <francois> ScribeNick: MartinJ
14:09:40 <MartinJ> ScribeNick: MartinJ
14:09:44 <francois> Topic: Doc Status
14:10:06 <MartinJ> francois:  We published the first public working draft as agreed
14:10:12 <francois> -> http://w3.org/TR/ct-guidelines FPWD of CT guidelines
14:10:39 <MartinJ> ... thanks everyone for participating.  I hope we will get some feedback.
14:10:57 <MartinJ> ... our job is not done yet as there are many areas still to cover in the draft
14:11:02 <MartinJ> ... next steps are..
14:11:19 <MartinJ> ... address editorial notes, make structure more clear
14:11:41 <MartinJ> ,,, keep clear concise guidelines.  POWDER..
14:12:03 <MartinJ> ... is there anything else that we should address, or any logistical remarks?
14:12:27 <MartinJ> ... looking for suggestions on how we could improve our way of working to move faster than we have done
14:12:29 <SeanP> I'm happy with how the meetings are run.
14:12:37 <Magnus> s/,,,/.../
14:12:44 <francois> Topic: Close some actions without much discussion
14:12:46 <andrews> +q
14:12:52 <francois> ack andrews 
14:13:05 <francois> s/Topic: Close some actions without much discussion//
14:13:21 <MartinJ> andrew: Many thanks to Francois and to Jo for driving this forward.
14:13:39 <MartinJ> ... question I had was how to the public respond to the draft?
14:14:03 <MartinJ> francois:  It is listed in the opening section of the document- to use the mailing list
14:14:25 <MartinJ> ... we may not get any comments but we really hope we do
14:14:35 <francois> Topic: Close some actions without much discussion
14:14:46 <francois> ACTION-625?
14:14:46 <trackbot-ng> ACTION-625 -- François Daoust to initiate discuss on the exception wording ref dangerous content -- due 2008-01-29 -- OPEN
14:14:46 <trackbot-ng> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/625
14:14:57 <MartinJ> francois: A bunch of actions were created and already resolved
14:15:06 <francois> Close ACTION-625
14:15:06 <trackbot-ng> ACTION-625 Initiate discuss on the exception wording ref dangerous content closed
14:15:10 <francois> ACTION-685
14:15:12 <francois> ACTION-685?
14:15:12 <trackbot-ng> ACTION-685 -- François Daoust to investigate embedded original headers in altered requests (message/http), external ref to original headers (application/external-body) and/or use of WARNING headers for 3.1.4 -- due 2008-03-10 -- OPEN
14:15:12 <trackbot-ng> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/685
14:15:45 <francois> Close ACTION-685
14:15:45 <trackbot-ng> ACTION-685 Investigate embedded original headers in altered requests (message/http), external ref to original headers (application/external-body) and/or use of WARNING headers for 3.1.4 closed
14:15:49 <francois> ACTION-686?
14:15:49 <trackbot-ng> ACTION-686 -- François Daoust to will organise the next CTTF Editors' meeting -- due 2008-03-10 -- OPEN
14:15:49 <trackbot-ng> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/686
14:16:11 <francois> Close ACTION-686
14:16:11 <trackbot-ng> ACTION-686 Will organise the next CTTF Editors' meeting closed
14:16:15 <francois> ACTION-731
14:16:18 <francois> ACTION-731?
14:16:18 <trackbot-ng> ACTION-731 -- Jo Rabin to enact changes resolved in this meeting -- due 2008-04-15 -- OPEN
14:16:18 <trackbot-ng> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/731
14:16:32 <francois> Close ACTION-731
14:16:32 <trackbot-ng> ACTION-731 Enact changes resolved in this meeting closed
14:17:00 <francois> -> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/products/12 Open actions
14:17:01 <MartinJ> ... as a reminder, please check your actions
14:17:15 <MartinJ> ... can see them from the link just pasted
14:17:31 <MartinJ> ... if they are not needed any more then please say so
14:17:44 <francois> Topic: Alteration of request bodies (§4.1.2)
14:18:10 <francois> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Apr/0015.html Last message on alteration of request bodies
14:18:38 <MartinJ> francois: there seems to be some consensus
14:19:22 <matt> matt has joined #bpwg
14:19:42 <MartinJ> ... we should not go into too many details in the document regarding the cases when the CT proxy actually has to change the request body but all the changes are to make sure the from the CP point of view the request it as it expects it to be
14:19:59 <MartinJ> ... so from the CP point of view the proxy is transparent
14:21:01 <MartinJ> ... document seems a bit clumsy in ites dealing with the HTTP request.  It gives the feeling that there is always one request, when it might actually be multiple requests between the user agent and the proxy 
14:21:20 <MartinJ> ... not sure how to phrase that in a simple enough way
14:21:40 <SeanP> q+
14:21:47 <francois> ack SeanP 
14:21:54 <MartinJ> ... maybe "The CT proxy must make sure that from the CP point of view the request remains unchanged" but this is not clear at all
14:24:04 <MartinJ> SeanP: we are not really talking about something being changed because it hasn't been sent yet.  It's the content provider getting what it expects.  
14:24:15 <MartinJ> francois: Yes exactly.  
14:24:49 <MartinJ> SeanP: So "unchanged" is probably not the right word to use.
14:24:50 <SeanP> q+
14:24:56 <francois> ack SeanP 
14:25:31 <MartinJ> francois: So should we just replace it all with "The CP must always receive what it expects".
14:26:01 <MartinJ> SeanP: but without that happening it won't work at all
14:26:34 <MartinJ> Francois: So I now think we should just drop this part and not say anything about request bodies since it is obvious what must happen
14:27:05 <MartinJ> zakim, mute me
14:27:05 <Zakim> MartinJ should now be muted
14:27:21 <francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: drop the editorial note in 4.1.2 re alteration of request bodies on the basis that it's trivial that the CT-proxy makes sure the Content Provide receives what it expects
14:27:26 <jo> I think we should mention request bodies otherwise it will seem as though something is missing 
14:27:43 <MartinJ> +1 to Jo
14:27:54 <jo> we should mention that certain fix-ups are required but are out of scope
14:28:07 <jo> give examples
14:28:48 <MartinJ> francois: OK - it doesn't do any harm to state the obvious
14:29:18 <francois> I'm not sure examples are needed here, but we could go with the "obvious yet true" statement about the Content Provider that must receive the form it expects
14:29:40 <SeanP> OK with me
14:29:44 <jo> I think that the wording will need to be carefully constructed
14:29:45 <MartinJ> and me
14:29:54 <MartinJ> zakim, unmute me
14:29:54 <Zakim> MartinJ should no longer be muted
14:30:30 <MartinJ> zakim, mute me
14:30:30 <Zakim> MartinJ should now be muted
14:30:55 <MartinJ> MartinJ: I think examples might imply that we needed them everywhere else too
14:31:12 <francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: to replace the editorial note in 4.1.2 re alteration of request bodies, write something along the lines of "the CT-proxy MUST ensure that the origin server receives the form it expects"
14:31:18 <jo> examples are needed elsewhere, I agree
14:31:22 <SeanP> On the examples, it might not hurt to put one inline or something just so the reader knows where we are coming from.
14:32:14 <MartinJ> francois: reading the document the good thing is that is not too long and the statements are simple and clear.
14:32:43 <MartinJ> ... adding examples in the doc may not be the best thing to do but we could have them in another section, addressed later on
14:33:14 <SeanP> +1 to resolution
14:33:24 <MartinJ> ... let's not spend too much time on this.  We all agree on the direction anyway..
14:33:47 <MartinJ> ... we have a line from the proposed resolution and we may or may not want to extend it to have examples
14:34:14 <MartinJ> +1 to resolution
14:34:33 <MartinJ> francois: If no objection  lets take that
14:34:45 <MartinJ> RESOLUTION: to replace the editorial note in 4.1.2 re alteration of request bodies, write something along the lines of "the CT-proxy MUST ensure that the origin server receives the form it expects"
14:35:16 <MartinJ> francois: anyone want to take an action for that or we can leave it in Jo's hands
14:35:21 <francois> ACTION-681?
14:35:21 <trackbot-ng> ACTION-681 -- François Daoust to ask aaron kemp for clarification of the character encoding issue -- due 2008-03-10 -- OPEN
14:35:21 <trackbot-ng> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/681
14:35:59 <francois> Close ACTION-681
14:35:59 <trackbot-ng> ACTION-681 Ask aaron kemp for clarification of the character encoding issue closed
14:36:27 <SeanP> I can do it
14:36:45 <francois> ScribeNick: Magnus
14:36:51 <francois> ACTION-680?
14:36:51 <trackbot-ng> ACTION-680 -- Robert Finean to provide a pseudo-code example of form transformation for CT document. -- due 2008-03-10 -- OPEN
14:36:51 <trackbot-ng> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/680
14:36:56 <Magnus> francois: the 2nd option is on Rob
14:37:07 <Magnus> ... might be worth leaving it open if we want to add some examples
14:37:20 <Magnus> ... for example form splitting
14:37:31 <Magnus> ... let's move on
14:37:34 <francois> Topic: Linearization or zoom capability (§4.1.2)
14:37:41 <francois> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Apr/0020.html SeanP's comments
14:37:48 <Magnus> francois: this is an issue raised by Sean
14:37:59 <Magnus> ... in 4.1.2 right after the editorial note
14:38:14 <Magnus> ... knowing about  Linearization or zoom capability
14:38:24 <Magnus> ... two things to consider
14:38:29 <Magnus> ... what are out intentions
14:38:42 <Zakim> +klanz2
14:38:43 <Magnus> ... we are talking about response ,whereas this section is about the request
14:38:53 <Magnus> s/out/our/
14:38:56 <MartinJ> zakim, klanz2 is really MartinJ
14:38:56 <Zakim> +MartinJ; got it
14:39:05 <Magnus> ... if we keep it we should split it into 2
14:39:14 <Magnus> ... one saying the proxy should not change the headers
14:39:19 <Magnus> ... and one for the headers
14:39:37 <francois> ScribeNick: MartinJ
14:39:37 <jo> this section is saying that the headers should not be changed if the device is/has a quart in pint pot browser
14:40:24 <MartinJ> SeanP: reading it again, we are saying that if the client has some transformation capabilities then it should be allowed to do that.
14:40:35 <MartinJ> ... you are right that it it seems to be in the wrong place
14:40:37 <Zakim> -MartinJ
14:40:58 <MartinJ> francois: we should split in two:  part in 4.4
14:41:31 <MartinJ> zakim, mute me
14:41:31 <Zakim> MartinJ.a should now be muted
14:41:48 <MartinJ> zakim, MartinJ.a is MartinJ
14:41:48 <Zakim> +MartinJ; got it
14:42:26 <MartinJ> SeanP: where's the line about were you allow transformation and where you don't - it seems kind of vague
14:42:53 <MartinJ> ... it's not a binary thing - I'm sure there's a range of abilities that clients have.  
14:43:11 <MartinJ> ... there may be content types that are not supported for example
14:43:33 <MartinJ> francois: so do you propose to just remove that part?
14:44:11 <MartinJ> SeanP: Not sure we want to remove it but we should either expand on it or whatever.
14:44:24 <MartinJ> francois: Anyone else? 
14:45:08 <MartinJ> ... I will take an action to clarify what we intend to say here
14:45:55 <francois> ACTION: daoust to raise discussion on the mailing-list and propose alternatives re linearization/zoom capabilities and the relation with CT-proxy
14:45:55 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-735 - Raise discussion on the mailing-list and propose alternatives re linearization/zoom capabilities and the relation with CT-proxy [on François Daoust - due 2008-04-22].
14:46:13 <francois> Topic: Users preferences
14:47:50 <MartinJ> francois: This was raised by Sean in an email.  In 4.1.2 we say that the proxy should not modify unless...
14:47:54 <francois> -> http://www.w3.org/TR/ct-guidelines/#sec-user-control Control by the User
14:48:30 <MartinJ> ... [one of the condtions] the user requested a restructured version...
14:49:40 <francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: list "Always request the desktop presentation of the resource" as one of the examples in 3.2.1
14:49:41 <MartinJ> ... In 4.1.2 I would have the first point unchanged, but the second point mentioning the user's preference
14:50:06 <SeanP> +1
14:50:38 <jo> jo has left #bpwg
14:50:40 <MartinJ> +1
14:50:50 <andrews> +1
14:51:17 <MartinJ> RESOLUTION: list "Always request the desktop presentation of the resource" as one of the examples in 3.2.1
14:52:02 <francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: add a bullet to the first list of bullets in 4.1.2 "any knowledge it has of user's preferences"
14:52:44 <SeanP> q+
14:52:49 <francois> ack SeanP 
14:53:36 <MartinJ> SeanP: Aren't we proposing that administrative agreements are a proxy for or form of the user's preferences?
14:54:07 <MartinJ> francois: I think we agreed that admin arrangements are out of scope of the document
14:54:49 <MartinJ> ... it makes sense to refer to preferences and not mention admin arrangements.  It's implied that they may override preferences
14:55:22 <MartinJ> ... 3.2.3 covers administrative arrangements such as terms and conditions that the user agrees to
14:55:33 <MartinJ> SeanP: OK
14:56:10 <MartinJ> francois: If we agree they are out of scope we should just take about them in 3.2.3
14:56:16 <MartinJ> s/take/talk/
14:56:37 <MartinJ> SeanP: That's fine with me
14:57:26 <francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: add a bullet to the first list of bullets in 4.1.2 "any knowledge it has of user's preferences"
14:57:29 <MartinJ> +1 to the proposed resolution
14:57:34 <SeanP> +1
14:57:49 <MartinJ> RESOLUTION: add a bullet to the first list of bullets in 4.1.2 "any knowledge it has of user's preferences"
14:58:40 <MartinJ> francois: same topic:  as a side effect of our discussion I suggest we remove the first bullet in 4.1.2
14:59:12 <MartinJ> implied by 3.2.3 there are the administrative arrangements
14:59:23 <MartinJ> s/implied/... implied/
14:59:36 <andrews> +1
14:59:37 <francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: remove first bullet that says: "any administrative arrangements that are in place with the user, or the server"
14:59:42 <MartinJ> +1
14:59:46 <SeanP> +1
14:59:52 <MartinJ> RESOLUTION: remove first bullet that says: "any administrative arrangements that are in place with the user, or the server"
15:01:11 <MartinJ> francois: some more discussion and actions are needed to address the remaining editorial notes so feel free to commence this on the mailing list.  You might take it on yourselves to progress these. 
15:01:35 <Zakim> -Magnus
15:01:36 <MartinJ> zakim, unmute me
15:01:37 <Zakim> MartinJ should no longer be muted
15:01:37 <Zakim> -SeanP
15:01:39 <Zakim> -andrews
15:01:47 <Zakim> -francois
15:01:51 <Zakim> -MartinJ
15:01:53 <Zakim> MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM has ended
15:01:54 <Zakim> Attendees were francois, Magnus, SeanP, +0789972aaaa, andrews, +1.857.362.aabb, MartinJ
15:02:49 <francois> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:02:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/15-bpwg-minutes.html francois
15:03:17 <MartinJ> me says thanks that was what I was going to ask :-)
15:03:46 <MartinJ> my battery ran out too fast as I was using WiFi for the call
15:05:07 <MartinJ> MartinJ has left #bpwg
15:19:35 <francois> RRSAgent, bye
15:19:35 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/15-bpwg-actions.rdf :
15:19:35 <RRSAgent> ACTION: daoust to raise discussion on the mailing-list and propose alternatives re linearization/zoom capabilities and the relation with CT-proxy [1]
15:19:35 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/15-bpwg-irc#T14-45-55
15:19:39 <francois> Zakim, bye
15:19:39 <Zakim> Zakim has left #bpwg