IRC log of bpwg on 2008-04-29

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:01:21 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #bpwg

14:01:21 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-irc

14:01:23 [trackbot-ng]

RRSAgent, make logs public

14:01:23 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #bpwg

14:01:25 [trackbot-ng]

Zakim, this will be BPWG

14:01:25 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot-ng; I see MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM scheduled to start now

14:01:26 [trackbot-ng]

Meeting: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference

14:01:26 [trackbot-ng]

Date: 29 April 2008

14:01:34 [francois]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Apr/0044.html

14:01:36 [jo]

zakim, code?

14:01:36 [Zakim]

the conference code is 2283 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), jo

14:01:38 [francois]

Chair: francois

14:01:45 [francois]

Regrets: Magnus, AndrewS

14:01:50 [francois]

Regrets+ Bryan

14:02:11 [hgerlach]

hgerlach has joined #bpwg

14:02:39 [rob]

rob has joined #bpwg

14:02:41 [Zakim]

MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM has now started

14:02:48 [Zakim]

+ +0207287aaaa

14:02:49 [Zakim]

+hgerlach

14:02:59 [hgerlach]

hi

14:03:03 [rob]

zakim, aaaa is me

14:03:03 [Zakim]

+rob; got it

14:03:11 [Zakim]

+jo

14:03:31 [SeanP]

SeanP has joined #bpwg

14:03:37 [Zakim]

+francois

14:03:48 [Zakim]

+Diego_La_Monica

14:04:08 [MartinJ]

zakim, Deigo_La_Monica is really me

14:04:08 [Zakim]

sorry, MartinJ, I do not recognize a party named 'Deigo_La_Monica'

14:04:31 [jo]

zakim, who is on the phone?

14:04:31 [Zakim]

On the phone I see hgerlach, rob, jo, francois, Diego_La_Monica

14:04:38 [francois]

zakim, Deigo_La_Monica is really MartinJ

14:04:38 [Zakim]

sorry, francois, I do not recognize a party named 'Deigo_La_Monica'

14:04:46 [francois]

zakim, Diego_La_Monica is really MartinJ

14:04:46 [Zakim]

+MartinJ; got it

14:04:49 [jo]

zakim, diego_la_monica is really martinj

14:04:49 [Zakim]

sorry, jo, I do not recognize a party named 'diego_la_monica'

14:05:25 [Zakim]

+SeanP

14:05:56 [SeanP]

I can do it

14:05:58 [jo]

scribe: Jo

14:06:08 [jo]

scribenick: jo

14:06:10 [SeanP]

Ok, I defer to Jo

14:06:25 [jo]

s/Ok, I defer to Jo//

14:06:41 [jo]

s/hi//

14:07:00 [jo]

Topic: Ajax / XHR and Content Transformation

14:07:00 [francois]

Topic: Ajax/XHR calls and CT

14:07:10 [francois]

s/Topic: Ajax/XHR calls and CT//

14:07:12 [jo]

s/Topic: Ajax/XHR calls and CT//

14:07:26 [francois]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Apr/0042.html discussion re Ajax/XHR calls

14:08:26 [jo]

fd: conclusion is that a proxy should examine the content of the page it receives and have a lot of scripts

14:08:30 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION 1.1: in §4.4, add a bullet point to the list of heuristics that says "examination of the content reveals that the page contains client-side scripts that may break if the page gets adapted"

14:09:34 [francois]

+1

14:09:38 [jo]

q+

14:09:42 [francois]

ack jo

14:10:40 [jo]

jo: wonders if adding the heuristic adds value, though it is obviously true, it doesn't say how to formulate a conclusion

14:11:05 [jo]

fd: that's also true of the other heuristics we enumerate in the same section

14:11:55 [rob]

q+ to say that if a page contains script then usually it does need transforming!

14:13:52 [francois]

ack rob

14:13:52 [Zakim]

rob, you wanted to say that if a page contains script then usually it does need transforming!

14:14:23 [Zakim]

-MartinJ

14:14:56 [hgerlach]

+q

14:15:06 [jo]

jo: I am thinking that we should not be doing product design and we need to have a greater degree of feedback from real vendors

14:15:17 [Zakim]

+MartinJ

14:15:32 [SeanP]

q+

14:15:34 [jo]

rob: usually we do the scripting on behalf of the phone but where the phone is script capable we do let it through

14:15:39 [francois]

ack hgerlach

14:16:11 [jo]

heiko: there was an open ajax workshop, were there any results

14:16:27 [jo]

fd: I don' think there was anything related to CT

14:16:39 [francois]

ack SeanP

14:17:19 [jo]

seanp: there are a couple of possibilities - e.g. a proxy runs the scripts or passes them through, there may also be some transformation

14:17:57 [jo]

... e.g. if link rewriting is done and some of the links in the Javascript might need to be rewritten, it might be smart enough to rewrite those too

14:18:20 [jo]

q+ to suggest we resolve to put it in as it does no harm

14:18:33 [francois]

ack jo

14:18:33 [Zakim]

jo, you wanted to suggest we resolve to put it in as it does no harm

14:18:38 [jo]

seanP: that was just by way of clarification not a proposed text

14:19:14 [jo]

jo: let's just put it in

14:19:28 [jo]

fd: I think what actually happens is out of scope

14:19:40 [jo]

rob: mention is fine

14:19:46 [hgerlach]

+q

14:19:48 [SeanP]

+1 for mentioning as a heuristic

14:20:01 [jo]

... the bit that said if there is script don't transform would be wrong

14:20:09 [jo]

+1

14:20:20 [rob]

+1

14:20:22 [francois]

ack hgerlach

14:21:01 [jo]

RESOLUTION 1.1: in §4.4, add a bullet point to the list of heuristics that says "examination of the content reveals that the page contains client-side scripts that may mis-operate if the page gets adapted"

14:21:20 [jo]

[note that the word "break" has been transformed]

14:21:59 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION 2.3: in §???, "Asynchronous HTTP requests sent from within a Web page (e.g. XHR calls) SHOULD include a no-transform directive"

14:22:40 [jo]

fd: another resolution related to that is to do with adding a no-transform directive to requests, not sure where to put it

14:22:58 [jo]

... initially I wanted to say something about content types etc.

14:23:23 [jo]

... but Jo persuaded me that this was not right

14:23:40 [jo]

s/persuaded/convinced/

14:23:49 [jo]

q+

14:23:53 [francois]

ack jo

14:24:40 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION 2.3: in 4.1.1, "Asynchronous HTTP requests sent from within a Web page (e.g. XHR calls) SHOULD include a no-transform directive" as a typical example

14:24:43 [jo]

jo: lets stick it in 4.1.1 as an example of when you might do that

14:25:00 [jo]

q+ to say that MAY is better

14:25:05 [francois]

ack jo

14:25:05 [Zakim]

jo, you wanted to say that MAY is better

14:25:08 [jo]

ack me

14:25:22 [jo]

rob: we mean a mobile friendly Web page

14:26:18 [SeanP]

+1 for MAY

14:26:29 [hgerlach]

+1

14:26:40 [jo]

jo: I think this would be text aloing the lines of ... MAY ... if it does not wish the request or the response to be altered by a CT proxy

14:27:19 [jo]

fd: <tap /> <tap />

14:27:19 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION 2.3: in 4.1.1, "As an example of this, a web page sending asynchronous HTTP requests (e.g. XHR calls) may include a no-transform directive if it doesn't want the message to be transformed"

14:27:31 [jo]

+1

14:27:32 [rob]

+1

14:27:35 [francois]

+1

14:27:38 [SeanP]

s/aloing/along/

14:27:39 [hgerlach]

+1

14:27:49 [SeanP]

+1

14:27:50 [jo]

RESOLUTION 2.3: in 4.1.1, "As an example of this, a web page sending asynchronous HTTP requests (e.g. XHR calls) may include a no-transform directive if it doesn't want the message to be transformed"

14:29:08 [jo]

fd: let's not discuss the content types for transformation (ACTION-725) we can do that later

14:29:30 [jo]

fd: I also had another one one which no longer makes sense so let's drop it

14:30:35 [jo]

... as things stand there is no way for the server or a proxy to know whether the request comes from the browser or from XHR and it might be worth pointing out to them as a LCC the need to distinguish XHR calls (Jo already mentioned this to Chaals)

14:30:54 [jo]

... I am not sure the distinction needs to be made ...

14:31:05 [jo]

... should we do this?

14:31:22 [rob]

q+

14:31:23 [jo]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: FD to draft a note to the WG and alert them to this discussion

14:31:34 [jo]

ack r

14:31:45 [jo]

rob: I'm not sure there is anything to say about it

14:32:09 [jo]

... not sure there is any need to distinguish

14:32:44 [jo]

... as long as there is something that identifies that this is part of the session and all responses come with their own content types which is what is important to us

14:33:52 [jo]

jo: don't see why not, it's not a big deal, they can ignore it if they want

14:34:22 [francois]

0

14:34:23 [jo]

ACTION: daoust to write to the XHR folks and point out a possible need to identify that a requst comes from script

14:34:23 [trackbot-ng]

Created ACTION-749 - Write to the XHR folks and point out a possible need to identify that a requst comes from script [on François Daoust - due 2008-05-06].

14:34:28 [hgerlach]

+1 proposed -1others

14:35:01 [SeanP]

+1 to writing to XHR folks

14:35:04 [jo]

close ACTION-718

14:35:04 [trackbot-ng]

ACTION-718 Summarize and continue discussion re Ajax/XHR requests and CT closed

14:35:09 [hgerlach]

q+

14:35:12 [jo]

close ACTION-739

14:35:12 [trackbot-ng]

ACTION-739 Summarize (again) discussion on Ajax/XHR and propose some resolutions closed

14:35:22 [jo]

ack h

14:36:38 [jo]

heiko: what about the content type part of ACTION-739

14:36:51 [jo]

fd: we will discuss this under ACTION-725 on Sean

14:37:02 [jo]

Topic: format of via header comment

14:37:12 [francois]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Apr/0040.html fd's proposal

14:38:44 [jo]

fd: we wanted to distinguish CT proxy from proxy - when were discussing this in the context of POWDER we said it would point to a resource describing what it would do

14:39:10 [jo]

... bryan pointed out in Seoul that just a flag would be useful

14:39:24 [jo]

... this could link to a powder resource when we get to that

14:39:50 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: format of the VIA header comments: [a URI to a POWDER resource that describes the CT-proxy's capabilities using the vocabulary-to-be when we're ready to switch to POWDER or] the CT

14:39:50 [francois]

namespace's URI "http://www.w3.org/2008/04/ct#". Intention to transform must be indicated using the "active" property: "http://www.w3.org/2008/04/ct#active".

14:39:53 [jo]

... or a namespace id which just means "I am a transformation proxy"

14:40:21 [jo]

q+ to ask how to distinguish old style comments from new style comments when this is not a namespace any more

14:40:31 [francois]

ack jo

14:40:31 [Zakim]

jo, you wanted to ask how to distinguish old style comments from new style comments when this is not a namespace any more

14:42:03 [jo]

jo: worried about forward compatibility and how you will know to distinguish a flag from a link to some powder resource

14:42:17 [jo]

fd: it will be different URI

14:42:22 [jo]

jo: I guess we should say so

14:42:35 [jo]

fd: yes, <tap /> <tap />

14:44:21 [jo]

jo: maybe we should have a query string so we could have name / value pairs - just using a fragment ID may not be vvery extensible/flexible

14:44:45 [jo]

fd: perhaps we need more investigation if we don't know whether this is goofd practice or not

14:44:52 [jo]

s/goofd/good/

14:44:59 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: format of the VIA header comments: either the URI "http://www.w3.org/2008/04/ct", a URI derived from this one (that defines properties such as "active"), or a URI to a POWDER resource that describes the capabilities of the proxy

14:45:13 [jo]

+1

14:45:18 [francois]

+1

14:45:30 [SeanP]

+1

14:45:45 [jo]

fd: I will investigate how to be able to define multiple properties in the same URI

14:46:15 [jo]

ACTION: daoust to investigate how to add multiple property/values to the URI

14:46:15 [trackbot-ng]

Created ACTION-750 - Investigate how to add multiple property/values to the URI [on François Daoust - due 2008-05-06].

14:46:28 [jo]

RESOLUTION: format of the VIA header comments: either the URI "http://www.w3.org/2008/04/ct", a URI derived from this one (that defines properties such as "active"), or a URI to a POWDER resource that describes the capabilities of the proxy

14:47:26 [jo]

close ACTION-741

14:47:26 [trackbot-ng]

ACTION-741 Write a concrete proposal on use of via header closed

14:47:32 [jo]

close ACTION-742

14:47:32 [trackbot-ng]

ACTION-742 Write some concrete proposal on the format of the HTTP Via comment to advertise the CT-proxy's presence (and possibly intention to transform) closed

14:47:57 [jo]

Topic: Discussion on Session vs Persistent sessions (yada yada)

14:48:05 [francois]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Apr/0036.html fd's proposal

14:48:32 [jo]

fd: this all started as a discussion of what is in or out of scope

14:48:49 [jo]

... and went into a discussion of "other arrangements"

14:49:24 [jo]

... I don't understand what the distinction is between session settings and persistent settings so my proposal is to rewrite 3.2.1

14:49:34 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Rewrite §3.2.1 roughly based on what it was before: "They MAY also provide the ability for their users to make a persistent expression of preferences."

14:49:48 [jo]

... "persistent or semi-persistent expression of preferences"

14:50:11 [jo]

... to what it was before, I don't think we need to make a distinction

14:50:14 [SeanP]

I'm fine with that.

14:50:21 [francois]

+1

14:50:24 [hgerlach]

+1

14:50:26 [SeanP]

+1

14:50:30 [rob]

+1

14:50:31 [jo]

0

14:50:46 [jo]

RESOLUTION: Rewrite §3.2.1 roughly based on what it was before: "They MAY also provide the ability for their users to make a persistent expression of preferences."

14:51:55 [jo]

jo: notes that we are avoiding having a discussion on something that might reveal important things but for now, let's do it your way fd

14:52:27 [jo]

Topic: Sending two requests requests 4.1.2

14:52:51 [jo]

fd: in theory GET is idempotent so it should not matter

14:53:15 [jo]

... if you send more than one request. In practice I listed a number of cases where this is not true

14:53:22 [francois]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Apr/0043.html discussion

14:54:00 [jo]

fd: for POSTs this is of course a problem, so I don't think we need to emphasize this point

14:54:09 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION 1.1: at the end of §4.1.2, add "The proxy MUST NOT issue a POST/PUT request with altered headers when the response to the

14:54:09 [francois]

unaltered POST/PUT request contains an HTTP status code 200"

14:54:09 [francois]

(in other words, it may only send the altered request for a POST/PUT request when the unaltered one was refused with a clear 406)

14:55:24 [hgerlach]

q+

14:55:32 [francois]

ack hgerlach

14:55:56 [jo]

fd: in most cases the proxy will already know how to interact with the server by the time it gets to sending a POST

14:56:05 [jo]

heiko: what about one time URLs?

14:56:19 [jo]

fd: yeah, we are just talking about POSTs for now

14:56:54 [jo]

... but yes we should make the point that the proxy should strive always to send only one GET request?

14:57:01 [jo]

s/?//

14:57:12 [jo]

+1

14:57:16 [hgerlach]

+1

14:57:22 [MartinJ]

+1

14:57:25 [francois]

0

14:57:40 [rob]

+1

14:57:49 [jo]

RESOLUTION 1.1: at the end of §4.1.2, add "The proxy MUST NOT issue a POST/PUT request with altered headers when the response to the unaltered POST/PUT request contains an HTTP status code 200" (in other words, it may only send the altered request for a POST/PUT request when the unaltered one was refused with a clear 406)

14:58:06 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION 1.2.a: at the end of §4.1.2, add a "The theoretical idempotency of GET requests is unfortunately not always respected in practice. Not to break existing content, the proxy SHOULD strive to send only one request whenever possible."

14:58:14 [jo]

fd: let's see if we can resolve on the next one, which speaks to Heiko's last point

14:58:48 [jo]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION 1.2.a: at the end of §4.1.2, add a "The theoretical idempotency of GET requests is unfortunately not always respected in practice. Not to break existing content, the proxy SHOULD send only one request."

15:00:04 [jo]

+1

15:02:03 [francois]

+1

15:02:08 [jo]

RESOLUTION at the end of §4.1.2, add a "The theoretical idempotency of GET requests is unfortunately not always respected in practice. Not to break existing content, the proxy SHOULD send only one request."

15:02:58 [jo]

ACTION: daoust to make sure that we are clear about idempotency and side-effect freedome etc. per Dom's original illuminating point about this section

15:02:59 [trackbot-ng]

Created ACTION-751 - Make sure that we are clear about idempotency and side-effect freedome etc. per Dom's original illuminating point about this section [on François Daoust - due 2008-05-06].

15:04:26 [jo]

fd: next time we will discuss Sean's contribution and we also need to do the remainder of the poinst on the agenda so please study these points

15:04:34 [Zakim]

-MartinJ

15:04:38 [Zakim]

-rob

15:04:38 [Zakim]

-francois

15:04:43 [Zakim]

-jo

15:04:47 [Zakim]

-SeanP

15:04:56 [francois]

Zakim, list attendees

15:05:00 [jo]

s/poinst/points/

15:05:11 [francois]

RRSAgent, draft minutes

15:05:11 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html francois

15:05:11 [Zakim]

As of this point the attendees have been +0207287aaaa, hgerlach, rob, jo, francois, MartinJ, SeanP

15:06:29 [hgerlach]

sorry I was interrupted by my Boss:-)

15:06:30 [hgerlach]

Cheers

15:06:34 [jo]

Present: Heiko, Jo, Francois, MartinJ, SeanP

15:06:36 [Zakim]

-hgerlach

15:06:37 [Zakim]

MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM has ended

15:06:39 [Zakim]

Attendees were +0207287aaaa, hgerlach, rob, jo, francois, MartinJ, SeanP

15:06:59 [jo]

s/sorry I was interrupted by my Boss:-)//

15:07:08 [jo]

s/Cheers//

15:07:17 [jo]

s/I can do it//

15:08:08 [jo]

s/topic: Ajax\/XHR calls and CT//

15:08:26 [jo]

s/Topic: Ajax\/XHR calls and CT//

15:08:50 [jo]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:08:50 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:09:02 [rob]

rob has left #bpwg

15:09:34 [jo]

s/Topic: Ajax//

15:09:48 [jo]

s/XHR calls and CT//

15:09:56 [jo]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:09:56 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:10:54 [jo]

s/Topic: Ajax//g

15:11:07 [jo]

s/XHR calls and CT//g

15:11:14 [jo]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:11:14 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:13:00 [jo]

s/^/ XHR//

15:13:10 [jo]

rrsagent. make minutes

15:13:23 [jo]

s/rrsagent. make minutes//

15:13:31 [jo]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:13:31 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:16:00 [jo]

it should be that s.kkk.lll. works

15:16:18 [jo]

s/it should be that s.kkk.lll. works//

15:17:11 [jo]

s/ XHR and Content Transformation/Ajax XHR and Content Transformation/

15:17:29 [jo]

s./Ajax.Topic: .

15:17:40 [jo]

rrsagent, draft minutes

15:17:40 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:23:26 [jo]

s|s./Ajax.Topic: .||

15:23:34 [jo]

rrsagent, draft minutes

15:23:34 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:24:00 [jo]

s|s/^/ XHR//

15:24:12 [jo]

s|s/\///||

15:24:24 [jo]

s|s/topic: Ajax\///||

15:24:54 [jo]

s|s////||

15:25:03 [jo]

s|s////||

15:25:31 [jo]

s|/Ajax XHR and Content Transformation|Topic: Ajax, XHR and Content Transformation|

15:26:04 [jo]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:26:04 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:27:22 [jo]

s/s|s//

15:27:46 [jo]

s|s/^/ XHR//||

15:28:05 [jo]

s|/^/ XHR//||

15:28:11 [jo]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:28:11 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:29:50 [jo]

Present+ Rob

15:29:56 [jo]

rrsagent, draft minutes

15:29:56 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:31:38 [jo]

s/RESOLUTION 2.3: in 4.1.1/RESOLUTION: In 4.1.1/

15:32:14 [jo]

s/RESOLUTION 1.1: a/RESOLUTION: a/

15:32:51 [jo]

s/RESOLUTION at the end /RESOLUTION: at the end /

15:33:05 [jo]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:33:05 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:34:01 [jo]

s/RESOLUTION 1.1: in/RESOLUTION: in/

15:34:34 [jo]

s/RESOLUTION at the end /RESOLUTION: at the end /

15:34:39 [jo]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:34:39 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:36:07 [jo]

s|s/RESOLUTION: at the end /RESOLUTION: at the end /||

15:36:39 [jo]

s|RESOLUTION at the end of §4.1.2, add a|RESOLUTION: at the end of §4.1.2, add a

15:36:45 [jo]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:36:45 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:37:58 [jo]

s/s|RESOLUTION at the end of §4.1.2, add a|RESOLUTION: at the end of §4.1.2, add a//

15:38:09 [jo]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:38:09 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:41:46 [francois]

s/RESOLUTION at the end of/RESOLUTION: at the end of/

15:42:04 [francois]

RRSAgent, draft minutes

15:42:04 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-bpwg-minutes.html francois