13:56:36 RRSAgent has joined #bpwg 13:56:36 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/07/02-bpwg-irc 13:56:38 RRSAgent, make logs public 13:56:38 Zakim has joined #bpwg 13:56:40 Zakim, this will be BPWG 13:56:40 ok, trackbot; I see MWI_BPWG(Checker TF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes 13:56:41 Meeting: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference 13:56:41 Date: 02 July 2008 13:57:43 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobileok-checker/2008Jul/0005.html 13:59:51 Chair: Abel 14:02:15 abel has joined #bpwg 14:03:12 MWI_BPWG(Checker TF)10:00AM has now started 14:03:20 + +34.61.051.aaaa 14:05:04 zakim, code? 14:05:04 the conference code is 2794 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), francois 14:05:11 +Francois 14:05:11 - +34.61.051.aaaa 14:05:17 +berrueta 14:05:38 zakim, berrueta is me 14:05:38 +abel; got it 14:05:49 zakim, miguel is with me 14:05:49 +miguel; got it 14:06:25 + +49.238.aabb 14:06:28 zakim, aabb is me 14:06:28 +dom; got it 14:06:42 zakim, who's on the call? 14:06:42 On the phone I see Francois, abel, dom 14:06:43 abel has abel, miguel 14:07:05 + +34.60.749.aacc 14:07:18 zakim, aacc is Oscar 14:07:18 +Oscar; got it 14:07:33 Scribe: francois 14:07:37 ScribeNick: francois 14:09:44 [Introduction of Oscar] 14:09:50 agenda-->http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobileok-checker/2008Jul/0007.html 14:10:08 Topic: New grammar validation 14:10:28 sorry, this is the agenda -->http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobileok-checker/2008Jul/0005.html 14:10:36 dom: I sent an email on Monday to state that I implemented the new grammar validation algorithm. 14:10:49 Basically that means we only check XHTML Basic 1.0 and 1.1 14:10:59 ... and XHTML MP 1.0, 1.1, and 1.2 14:11:13 ... I had to introduce a third state: "not validated" 14:11:32 ... I also fixed a bug that made the checker fail on unknown DTDs. 14:11:55 ... Basically, it crashed when it couldn't find the DTD in the in-JAR catalog. 14:12:13 ... I updated the results of the test suites to reflect this 14:12:29 -> http://www.w3.org/mid/1214894494.12088.12.camel@altocumulustier Changes in validation algorithm 14:13:25 abel: the checker crashes now in some cases where it didn't before. 14:14:00 s/abel/miguel 14:14:03 dom: it might be related to a commit Francois did last week, that fixed a Linux bug. Could you check the case more precisely 14:15:10 Topic: Proposed moki for object processing rule 14:15:43 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobileok-checker/2008Jul/0001.html moki proposal 14:16:11 actually this is the most recent one--> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobileok-checker/2008Jul/0004.html 14:16:44 miguel: introduced new attributes to match the new requirements, rendered, tasted 14:17:01 ... some objects will be tasted and some will be rendered 14:17:46 ... question is about objects without type attribute 14:19:28 abel: if the type of the object is set to an unrecognized mime type, should we download it, ignore it? 14:19:47 dom: if the type attribute is set to image/gif or image/jpeg, then the object is not going to be tasted. 14:20:01 ... If there is no type attribute, then the object is going to be tasted. 14:20:07 s/is set to/is set to something different from / 14:20:21 on type="foobar" => tasted="false" 14:20:34 on no type => tasted="true" 14:20:34 [francois notes that this is not what the doc says right now, but that is what it "should" say] 14:21:24 proposal for the moki related to object processing->http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobileok-checker/2008Jul/0004.html 14:21:30 dom: have you seen the reply I made to your proposal? Main question is about images. Do you plan to add rendered as well to images? 14:21:34 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobileok-checker/2008Jul/0006.html 14:21:51 ... "Tasted" a priori doesn't apply to images, but "rendered" does 14:23:28 abel: "isBlank" is for something in the Object Processing rule. 14:23:59 dom: I would prefer a single attribute, as it's easier to parse and read. 14:24:01 isEmpty is about OBJECTS_SCRIPT-5 14:24:24 isBlank is about OBJECTS_SCRIPT-6 and so on 14:24:30 tasted=true + rendered=true , tasted=false + rendered=false, tasted=true + rendered=false 14:24:35 dom: I think we should also do it for rendered and tasted. One attribute to rule them all. 14:24:58 so we should have only one attribuet like "loadtype" with three values: tasted, rendered, none 14:25:50 miguel: If you think that's easier, I don't see any problem 14:26:12 dom: yes, I think it's easier to parse only one attribute as there are only three possibilities here 14:27:09 miguel: ok, not sure about tasted/rendered as they are not exclusive. 14:27:13 [so 2 attributes instead of 5] 14:27:29 dom: I don't see how you could have something rendered that is not tasted. 14:28:02 miguel: we could try and check if we run into troubles. 14:28:13 dom: yes. Anyway, it's mostly cosmetic. 14:28:41 miguel: Regarding images, you asked if images should have the same kind of attributes. 14:29:12 ... In the moki, we'll have only images that are going to be rendered. 14:29:33 ... no need to include the images that are only tasted. 14:29:53 dom: I think you're right indeed. 14:30:35 14:30:58 dom: you'll be able to make sure that the image will be counted only once in the example I just pasted? 14:31:06 miguel: yes. 14:31:31 ... We won't count images that are already encountered as objects 14:33:50 ... Related to the NON-TEXT_ALTERNATIVES text on real images. 14:36:34 ... Initially, there was the same kind of thing in OBJECTS_OR_SCRIPT, but we're not testing this anymore. 14:36:37 abel: but we *are* checking the alt attribute 14:36:41 dom: oh, right 14:36:56 ... I guess we lost that when we rewrote the object_or_script test 14:37:20 francois: wouldn't the "warning" on empty element apply here? 14:37:45 abel: no, because it only applies to images that are not "image/jpeg" or "image/gif" 14:38:10 dom: That's correct. At this point, given the difficulty to get this algorithm right, I would suggest we simply ignore this for the time being. 14:38:31 abel: I think a warning would be needed. 14:39:00 dom: I guess we could mention it to Jo. I don't think it would trigger another Last Call, as it's just an editorial "mistake". 14:39:23 ... If it's too complicated to change the wording, I guess we should forget about it. 14:39:43 ... The cost of doing it may be higher than the benefit it brings (a warning in this case) 14:40:12 ACTION: Abel to send a note to Jo about the lack of warning on empty GIF/JPEG objects 14:40:12 Created ACTION-805 - Send a note to Jo about the lack of warning on empty GIF/JPEG objects [on Abel Rionda - due 2008-07-09]. 14:40:51 dom: I think we can leave it for Jo to decide whether it needs to be fixed or not. 14:40:53 abel: ok 14:40:55 miguel: ok 14:42:28 abel: wondering whether all images in an object need to be supported, or if some of them is enough? 14:42:46 dom: All of them need to be supported in the current algorithm, and that's intended. 14:43:15 dom: Do you have any estimate when you may have a first version of the implementation of these changes available? 14:44:24 abel: It should be finished for the next call. Beginning of next week, actually. 14:44:58 ... For Monday, for sure. 14:45:23 dom: I'll personally be on vacation starting tomorrow night, but I guess Francois can review this. 14:45:45 [call adjourned] 14:45:47 -Oscar 14:45:49 -dom 14:45:49 -abel 14:45:50 -Francois 14:45:52 MWI_BPWG(Checker TF)10:00AM has ended 14:45:53 Attendees were +34.61.051.aaaa, Francois, abel, miguel, +49.238.aabb, dom, +34.60.749.aacc, Oscar 14:45:56 RRSAgent, draft minutes 14:45:56 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/07/02-bpwg-minutes.html francois 15:11:30 abel has left #bpwg 16:21:24 Zakim has left #bpwg