Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference

 

 

<trackbot> Date: 24 June 2008

<hgerlach> Hi Guys, I saw you did a great job while the F2F - Thanks a lot

<scribe> scribe: Jo

Summary from F2F

francois: a great deal of progress - spent whole day of first day on it
... want to summarise the progress
... as listed in the agenda
... 1) we are going to make the doc normative, means rechartering the group
... 2) "extensive" discussion about link element and decided to re-introduce "link to self"
... we discussed the semantics of link element and resolved a convention to disambiguate the two senses of link element viz "I am" vs "I can be" mobile friendly
... 3) we decided to rewrite sect 4.1.2 as "proxy treatment of HTTP request"
... 4) use of OPTIONS was relegated to "scope for future work"
... 5) we remain silent on whether a CT proxy should be mobileOK and whether it may/should leave mobileOK content alone
... 6) we are not going to discuss "session" but discuss "Web site" and leave the term undefined
... don't have to do content tasting on all resources of a Web site but should be done when following a link to a new Web site
... 7) no difference between proxies that do URI rewriting and those that don't
... hence URI rewriting proxies are in scope
... 8) we're going to move the requirements to Scope and remove the ones we could not meet into scope for future work
... 9) so now we are left with persistent expression of user preferences
... as the remaining outstanding issue

<hgerlach> AI 261?

francois: any questions or comments?

heiko: ref ISSUE-261, I mentioned that I would like to have an allow list

francois: allow and disallow list is part of the remaining issue

heiko: [@@ scribe could not hear]

francois: we will come back to allow and disallow list as part of the discussion of this issue

<francois> minutes F2F day on CT

ACTION-769: ping Soonho for feedback

<francois> ACTION-769?

<trackbot> ACTION-769 -- François Daoust to ping Soonho on providing feedback -- due 2008-06-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/769

<francois> Close ACTION-769

<trackbot> ACTION-769 Ping Soonho on providing feedback closed

<francois> ACTION-711?

<trackbot> ACTION-711 -- Soonho Lee to provide Feedback on Content Transformation Document -- due 2008-03-13 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/711

<francois> ACTION: daoust to see with Soonho if he can find someone else to provide feedback on the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-804 - See with Soonho if he can find someone else to provide feedback on the document [on François Daoust - due 2008-07-01].

francois: soonho has moved to a new job, so can't do it

jo: how about finding someone else to pick it up?

ISSUE-242: User Expression of preferences

francois: we started discussing this at the F2F but we ran out of time and were totally exhausted
... we decided that it's permissible to ask for a restructured version on a site by site basis
... if there is a blanker user preference, if there are multiple representations then the CT proxy should tell the user
... we clarified that a CT proxy where there is an arrangement with the server this is out of scope of the guidelines, it counts as adaptation
... the no-transform directive means that a redirect is needed
... @@@ could not quite keep up, referenced in agenda
... I want to know if we agree on the goal of addressing section 3.2 "Control of the behavior of the proxy"
... the idea is to integrate this section in the rest of the document
... and it addresses Sean's point as to clarifying where user control ...

<andrews> Zarkim, unmute me

jo: I think that we should have a new draft before considering this in detail
... enough of the document has changed to make it difficult to see how this all pans out without doing htis
... unfortuantely I am not going to get to this for a little while as I have to do a draft of BP and one of mobileOK as top priority to meet the 15 July timeframe for major announcement of BP work

francois: ref discussion last week, then we may be able to integrate more clearly where control takes effect
... and indicate quite clearly where control takes effect

[above in answer to a question from Andrews requesting clarification]

francois: I think we should continue discussion of the issue on the mailing list

seanP: I agree I am a bit confused now too and am fine with doing it this way

francois: this includes allow and disallow lists in its reference to administrative arrangements

<hgerlach> +1

francois: in answer to Heiko's earlier question, so we should wait for the updated draft
... and I am willing to do all the work, Jo, don't worry

[scribe may not have heard the last properly :)]

francois: not sure I made that commitment, Jo
... any other issues we can take on today's call?

[no comments]

francois: so let's close the call now

heiko: do we have a time line, colleagues are asking

francois: the main issue is that the BP doc is going to rec, and there is other stuff like the mobileOK doc that also needs refreshing and those docs have priority over ct because they are about to make major rec track transitions
... so basically we are waiting for Jo, and if no one has a comment at that point then we will publish a LCWD and see what people say

jo: content transformation summit event is informally planned for September in London, and we hope to be in Candidate Recommendation by then, or at the very least still in Last Call

jo: hope to have something in next few weeks

francois: OK then let's adjourn