W3C

Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference

03 Jul 2008

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Francois, Pontus, yeliz, achuter, dom, abel, Bryan_Sullivan, hgerlach, adam, Kai_Dietrich, SeanP, jsmanrique, jo
Regrets
murari, rob, EdM, nacho, dan
Chair
francois
Scribe
yeliz

Contents


Accessibility document

<francois> Updated draft of the doc

francois: updated document for publication

<francois> Shawn's comments

some comments made by Shawn which delayed the publication

Alan: Shawn sent some comments that she doesn't mind

<achuter> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/ED-mwbp-wcag-20080702/

Alan: correcting the names at the top of the document, Liam made CSS to make the navigation look better
... put the sub-heading with the overview to make it clearer to identfiy the document
... long list of BP that has not been checked which I don't remember the page they belong to
... so it's more complete
... there was a confusion about the together document so that now stayed in
... is there any reservation, please say so

Francois: I think the document is fine
... trying to put the publication today and it might be delayed up until Monday

but otherwise we are on track and thank you for updating

mobile Web best practices 1.0

Francois: Jo published a new version

but didn't publicise it

<francois> Updated BP 1.0 draft

there are very few changes since proposed recommendation

<francois> diff file between PR and this draft

Francois: there are few changes, those agreed
... suggest you all look at the document, there will no be resolution

if you really have some points to make it's now or never

Mobile OK Basic tests

Francois: two comments were made, one from me and one from Dom

<francois> first comment from Dom

<francois> second comment from fd

Francois: send comments
... we won't be able to resolve today

<francois> Jo's proposals

we can start to look at them though

basically the problem is again with the object processing

there is a bit inconsistency in the current document

we say that the checker has to donwload the ...

to check the object, regardless of the...

so it's a bit inconsistent, we don't count the objects as if we don't retrieve the object

it would be good

if everyone can look at the proposal

Jo: there are, as a result of the comments made by dom and Francois

there are clarifications

in the latest, I am proposing solution

as Man. pointed out

we don't check the absence of an object, in the case of a valid image

we should clarify that we are planning to do that

<francois> Ex: <object src="img.gif" type="image/gif" /> is currently valid, but there should be an alternative text, some fallback text

if the object doesn't type attribute then we need to issue a worning

According to Dom's tests

some borwsers do

scribe:

I think it is worth maintaining the object processing

it's worth worning that they will behave that way

<francois> Ex: <object src="huge_img_of_several_MBs.png" type="image/png"> is retrieved by some user agents

We say that if the type attribute is specified, then don't count in those resources

the reason is that

that thing won't be retrived

that was missing in the last draft

Mobile OK tests will change with this

it won't effect the pass or fail

overall result of the test will not change

<dom> +1 to change being non-substantive

we do need this to be right

I am gooing ahead and change this unless there are comments

Francois: any comments from object procvessing experts?
... suggest that people take a close look at the proposed update

we will then approve the document next week

Jo: Francois fault to raise this issue
... text needs to be changed for this section
... I am hoping that it won't be substantive change
... failed docs will pass, hoping
... minor clarifiction of that, 406 means that server does not have a compatible to serve
... there is an issue here that external resources would have failed, 406
... if the URI does not resolve that will call a failure
... Kai, it would be good if you give your comments

kai: not sure what you mean

Jo: 406 means the server look at the header, and it doesn't have a suitable resource
... as things stand if the document links to somewhere..

kai: we had already cleared that
... what about the areas in the document that you link to

Jo: link resources is not examined
... if links broken, that should not cause a failre
... we had such a long discussion

Kai: I agree that;s a good soslution
... you can be responsible from where you link to

Jo: right, OK. Just to be completely clear about this
... link resources for which the URI does not resolve will result in failure

I believe we have discussed in the pass and agreed on this, but I just wanted to make sure that we agree

Kai: I believe the discussion cannot be brought to its full conclusion, but this seems reasonable.

Jo: I am happy with this, anybody has any views you should fail MobileOK for URLs not reolves then they need to speak now or keep quite forever

Francois: I agree with the suggested changes
... If you have any comments, please tell them. Please review the proposed changes and we will resolve next week
... any other comments on Mobile OK?
... Jo, can we get an updated draft next week

Jo: I will get it done tonigh, that will be draft 41

Progress corner

Francois: can we make a press release that we are working on enhanced best practices.

adam: I am definetely going to circulate on Monday

and a working draft next wed.

Adam: sorry for running late, I will circulate Monday

Francois: CTG, we are addressing the remaining issues
... it would be easier if we get the workign draft
... Checker?

Miguel: we are making progress
... we haven't finished the...
... we are finishing the object processing
... we hope to commit the latest changes tmorrow morning

and finish the scripts, and CSS stuff

Francois: depending on whether there is an objection to Jo's proposal to Object processing

Miguel: depending on your changes, we have to make some modifications to the code

Francois: it will just be adjustments, fine-tunning

Miguel: yes

Francois: thank you, any comment on checker?
... MobileOK Pro?

Kai: no, there is no to do

<dom> ACTION-798?

<trackbot> ACTION-798 -- Kai Scheppe to work proposed changes into the mobileOK Pro document and then turn it over to the group -- due 2008-06-25 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/798

Francois: action to address the comments dicussed in F2F

Kai: I haven't looked at that

Francois: you have one or two actions

<francois> ACTION-798?

<trackbot> ACTION-798 -- Kai Scheppe to work proposed changes into the mobileOK Pro document and then turn it over to the group -- due 2008-06-25 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/798

Francois: to be precise these are the actions
... thanks

Request for Comments on Widgets 1.0 Requirements Last Call WD

<francois> Request for comments on Widgets

Francois: let's look at the review requested

the document is in last call, we were asked to review

Francois: action someone to take a look at the document

<dom> ["The Last Call period ends on 1 August 2008."]

Francois: an report to the document, is there a specialist?

Jo: I am not going to offer to do that

I have other fish to fry

someone could take an action to raise an issue

and then we would be able to discuss on the list

Francois: would like to do both: to raise an issue and have someone to look at it

Jo: it depends what the final comments are
... I am happy to respond to that
... what I cannot promise to do review on time and then take it further

any volunteer?

Francois: anybody?

Brian: I just gona say to make initial comments?

Francois: initial comments to trigger the discussion in the mailing list?

Bryan: not sure what is raising an issue?

Francois: we could do it right now
... creating an issue now

Dom: I guess if we have someone owning an action, issue is unneeded, overhead

Pontus: I will be on vocation for 4 weeks

so may be you are not the right victom

Francois: Bryan, volunteer?

Bryan: I can send some comments to the list

<dom> ACTION: Bryan to send initial comments on Widget Requirements [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/03-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-806 - Send initial comments on Widget Requirements [on Bryan Sullivan - due 2008-07-10].

Francois: initial comments would be good

Thanks Bryan

Issues and Actions

Francois: already some open actions are closed

<francois> Obsolete actions already closed

<dom> 12 pending review action items

Francois: some pending review actions

Jo: I just wanted to mention that we had a discussion about if we will have calls in August

Francois: you are both away in August

I was planning to create a poll and send the link to the list

Jo: why don't we do it with a poll

Francois: I will create a little poll and see where that leads
... some calls won't happen in August
... pending actions?

<dom> ACTION-637?

<trackbot> ACTION-637 -- Alan Chuter to check on which WCAG 1.0 checkpoints were dropped in 2.0 due to untestability. -- due 2008-02-12 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/637

Action 637?

<trackbot> Sorry, bad ACTION syntax

related to mobile OK pro, we are not stressing this ..

any objection to close this?

<dom> close ACTION-637

<trackbot> ACTION-637 Check on which WCAG 1.0 checkpoints were dropped in 2.0 due to untestability. closed

<dom> ACTION-677?

<trackbot> ACTION-677 -- Daniel Appelquist to create an issue to start bringing together potential test cases. -- due 2008-03-06 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/677

Action 677

<trackbot> Sorry, bad ACTION syntax

<dom> ISSUE-268?

<trackbot> ISSUE-268 -- Test cases to illustrate mobile web application best practices -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/268

<dom> close ACTION-677

<trackbot> ACTION-677 Create an issue to start bringing together potential test cases. closed

Francois: to advertise the examples on caching dynamic, etc. I am a bit late on my action

<dom> ACTION-688?

<trackbot> ACTION-688 -- Charles McCathieNevile to check if Opera supports WBXML in and/or out of its WML support -- due 2008-03-11 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/688

Francois: has any impact mobile Web best practices?
... Charles never replied, don't need anymore?

any comment?

Jo: what about leaving it open

Francois: how does that affect mobile web application best practiices?
... Why?

Jo: he didn't do it, did he?

Dom: we put it in pending even though it is not complete
... it is not relevant anymore

Bryan: I don't know about Opera's support for .... But
... most common xml encoding is WBXML
... every device that has SMS suport, they do WBXML
... not sure about Opera, but it is a useful thing for MWBP

<dom> reopen ACTION-688

<trackbot> ACTION-688 Check if Opera supports WBXML in and/or out of its WML support re-opened

Francois: let's switch it to open then
... WBXML can be used for compression...

<dom> ACTION-720?

<trackbot> ACTION-720 -- Daniel Appelquist to raise an issue on extending BPs on ADC and seamless Korean inputs -- due 2008-03-27 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/720

Francois: I don't think it is relevant anymore

any objection to close this action?

<dom> close ACTION-720

<trackbot> ACTION-720 Raise an issue on extending BPs on ADC and seamless Korean inputs closed

<dom> ACTION-724?

<trackbot> ACTION-724 -- Jo Rabin to raise discussion on list as to clarification of 2.5.2 "In cases where user preferences contradict server preferences, server preferences prevail, except where the user specifically requires their preferences to over-rule those of the server." -- due 2008-04-01 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/724

<dom> ISSUE-242?

<trackbot> ISSUE-242 -- User expression of persistent and session preferences -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/242

Francois: you didn't do the action, but because of the issue, we can close the action, do you agree Jo?

<dom> close ACTION-724

<trackbot> ACTION-724 Raise discussion on list as to clarification of 2.5.2 "In cases where user preferences contradict server preferences, server preferences prevail, except where the user specifically requires their preferences to over-rule those of the server." closed

Francois: close then

<dom> ACTION-748?

<trackbot> ACTION-748 -- Fran├žois Daoust to check what we need to do about a conformance section in BP2 -- due 2008-05-01 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/748

Francois: any comment on this action?

<dom> close ACTION-748

<trackbot> ACTION-748 Check what we need to do about a conformance section in BP2 closed

Let's close the action

Bryan: we already moved those section from the doc anyway

<dom> ACTION-753?

<trackbot> ACTION-753 -- Jo Rabin to contact Tom Hume of Future Platforms about use of microformats -- due 2008-05-15 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/753

Francois: let's close the action

<dom> ISSUE-248?

<trackbot> ISSUE-248 -- Can mobile device browsers make use of microformats? -- RAISED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/248

Dom: we don't have any action open on Microformats
... need to assign action to somebody to explore microformats? we need somebody to explore it, anybody?

Francois: we switch this to pending action this morning

<Kai> I think it is interesting, but I can't devote time to it

we can live it open but need somebody to work on it

Francois: mobile browsers support microformats, and can we suggest it in MWBP?

<dom> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: microformats are not deployed enough today in mobile browsers to deserve inclusion in MWABP (ISSUE-248)

to explore this and find out whether mobile browsers support microformats?

<jo> -1 to proposed resolution, I don't think we know

<dom> ok, sounds fair

<dom> let's leave it open then

Francois: we need further investigation
... lets switch back to open

<dom> close ACTION-753

<trackbot> ACTION-753 Contact Tom Hume of Future Platforms about use of microformats closed

dom: we can close the action

<dom> ACTION-760?

<trackbot> ACTION-760 -- Jo Rabin to reiterate the caveat on MobileOK in response to Seungyun and cc Korean Task FOrce -- due 2008-05-22 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/760

<dom> close ACTION-760

<trackbot> ACTION-760 Reiterate the caveat on MobileOK in response to Seungyun and cc Korean Task FOrce closed

<dom> ACTION-773?

<trackbot> ACTION-773 -- Jo Rabin to send his concerns to the mailing-list re. ISSUE-242 -- due 2008-06-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/773

Jo: no response from Korean task force

<dom> close ACTION-773

<trackbot> ACTION-773 Send his concerns to the mailing-list re. ISSUE-242 closed

<dom> ACTION-775.

<dom> ACTION-775?

<trackbot> ACTION-775 -- Jo Rabin to enact the RESOLUTION on OBJECTS or script and other updates to the references required as a result of other documents being in new revision -- due 2008-06-19 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/775

Jo: I have done it three times

<dom> close ACTION-775

<trackbot> ACTION-775 Enact the RESOLUTION on OBJECTS or script and other updates to the references required as a result of other documents being in new revision closed

Francois: change it under human

<dom> ACTION-795?

<trackbot> ACTION-795 -- Daniel Appelquist to see if R&D colleagues from Spain can help for developing/maintening mobileOK checker -- due 2008-06-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/795

<dom> close ACTION-795

<trackbot> ACTION-795 See if R&D colleagues from Spain can help for developing/maintening mobileOK checker closed

<dom> ACTION-803?

<trackbot> ACTION-803 -- Kai Scheppe to get the definitive mobileOK example from Phil Archer -- due 2008-06-25 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/803

Francois: he did find some people, so close

Bryan: I would like to keep it open

<dom> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2008Jun/0063.html

<dom> ACTION-803: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2008Jun/0063.html

<trackbot> ACTION-803 Get the definitive mobileOK example from Phil Archer notes added

\Bryan\Kai

Kai: I haven't seen that, I would like to keep it open

<dom> reopen ACTION-803

<trackbot> ACTION-803 Get the definitive mobileOK example from Phil Archer re-opened

<dom> close ACTION-803

<trackbot> ACTION-803 Get the definitive mobileOK example from Phil Archer closed

Kai: close this and open an action to follow on that

Francois: that closes the pending review actions

<Kai> ACTION: Kai to check on discussion of mobileOK pertinent issues in POWDER [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/03-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-807 - Check on discussion of mobileOK pertinent issues in POWDER [on Kai Scheppe - due 2008-07-10].

<francois> Overdue actions

there are some open actions, all take a look at these actions

<dom> (still 36 overdue actions)

Francois: goal is to have 5 minutes before the call and update the due that and put some rationale
... some actions go back to March so it would be good if they were addressed timely

I will remind you these actions

so if you can't please let me know that you cannot complete them

not talking about the overdue actions from ...

There is one for yeliz related to ARIA

Yeliz: I don't think I have a definete answer this

Francois: ARIA would be useful but ...
... please have a look at the actions and update the listed actions
... can we look at the open issues?

<francois> Open issues

Francois: there are very old issues
... what do you think about the old actions?

Kai, we need to make sure that we don't forget anything

Francois: important point is that issues don't have actions associated to them, they don't trigger any discussion
... we have an issue for example that sms....
... can we come to conclusion on that?

<dom> ISSUE-253?

<trackbot> ISSUE-253 -- Binding to Incoming SMS from Script -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/253

Francois: talking about issue 253

Adam: I don't know any way of doing this

<Zakim> jo, you wanted to say I only raised the issue because no one else was willing to when it was raised in Seoul

Adam: there was a comment to me, at the document it says... specific ways of doing it, and may be we need to cut this and say we cannot do this

<jo> have nothing to add on this subject ...

Bryan: wrt generic web applications...messaging is still under develeopments and Widget dev. is ...
... is there a way to arbitrarily bind an application to an incoming SMS, other than specific device API
... quite well supported....but from a generic, W3C perspective, may be quite early

<jo> +1 to closing issue

Francois: it already says push

Adam: there is no standard way of doing it
... I am happy to close this issue

Francois: there are 3 other issues, marked as pending

<francois> ISSUE-239?

<trackbot> ISSUE-239 -- We still have not found a suitable home for the Techniques. -- RAISED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/239

Francois: dom checked the w3C copyright, and need to move the techniques to anywhere else

<francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: The WG is not responsible for transferring the techniques any longer. Close ISSUE-239.

<Kai> +1 to closing it

and suggest that it is not the problem of the working group

Jo: I guess this means that the techniques are forever...
... before closing this

Francois: techniques is still opened

Jo: I think we need an issue that the whole thing will be shut down

<Kai> We should shut it down properly.

Jo: I prefer if we kill it
... I mean turn it off, sorry guys it's gone

<francois> Techniques Wiki

Francois: it's already done, it's no longer maintained

Jo: it is possible that it contains info. inaccurate

<Kai> q

Jo: can we have it disappeared

Francois: I am not sure about the doc.

<hgerlach> heiko has to leave- sorry, bye

Kai: I agree with Jo, it has to go, nobody is maintining and can be embarrassing

Francois: we like to have consistency

Kai: that's what jo suggested

<jo> ACTION: daoust to arrange the funeral of Techniques [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/03-bpwg-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-808 - Arrange the funeral of Techniques [on Fran├žois Daoust - due 2008-07-10].

<francois> ISSUE-249?

<trackbot> ISSUE-249 -- Should we include information use of DCCI in BP2? -- RAISED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/249

Francois: last issue?

<francois> discussion during Sophia's F2F

Francois: we had a discussion in F2F meeting

<francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: DCCI is not implemented yet. We should not create any dependency on it. Don't mention DCCI in this version of MWABP.

<jo> +1

Francois: don't create dependency on something that has not been implemented yet

<Pontus2> +1

Francois: any objection on that?

<aconnors> +1

RESOLUTION: DCCI is not implemented yet. We should not create any dependency on it. Don't mention DCCI in this version of MWABP.

<francois> ISSUE-252?

<trackbot> ISSUE-252 -- Currency of Scope Document -- RAISED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/252

Francois: mostly already done

<francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: remove reference to scope of BP1 from BP2

Francois: Adam, do you remember this?

Adam: I think we talked about this at the F2F

<jo> +1

<aconnors> +1

Francois: any objection

RESOLUTION: remove reference to scope of BP1 from BP2

Francois: that's all the issue I wanted to address

<jo> [thanks Francois for chairing which was a great help :-)]

Francois: thanks for attending, we will discuss the future of the mobile Ok tests

<jsmanrique> see you

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Bryan to send initial comments on Widget Requirements [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/03-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: daoust to arrange the funeral of Techniques [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/03-bpwg-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Kai to check on discussion of mobileOK pertinent issues in POWDER [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/03-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2008/07/03 15:47:57 $