IRC log of bpwg on 2008-07-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:54:51 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #bpwg

13:54:51 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/07/22-bpwg-irc

13:54:53 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs public

13:54:53 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #bpwg

13:54:55 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be BPWG

13:54:56 [trackbot]

Meeting: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference

13:54:56 [trackbot]

Date: 22 July 2008

13:54:56 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot; I see MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes

13:55:12 [francois]

Chair: francois

13:55:19 [francois]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Jul/0023.html

13:55:34 [francois]

Regrets: Pontus, Aaron

14:00:25 [rob]

rob has joined #bpwg

14:01:08 [SeanP]

SeanP has joined #bpwg

14:01:34 [Zakim]

MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM has now started

14:01:43 [Zakim]

+Francois

14:02:09 [Zakim]

+rob

14:03:00 [Zakim]

+SeanP

14:05:04 [jo]

jo has joined #bpwg

14:05:20 [jo]

zakim, code?

14:05:20 [Zakim]

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

14:05:50 [Zakim]

+jo

14:06:25 [jo]

zakim, who is here?

14:06:25 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Francois, rob, SeanP, jo

14:06:26 [Zakim]

On IRC I see jo, SeanP, rob, Zakim, RRSAgent, andrews, francois, trackbot, dom, matt

14:07:23 [Zakim]

+andrews

14:07:38 [rob]

Scribe: rob

14:07:45 [rob]

ScribeNick: rob

14:08:59 [rob]

Topic: Appendix B Examples

14:09:32 [rob]

francois: Jo's right, we can't go to last call with no Appendix B

14:10:01 [rob]

... 1st option is an "intermediate working draft" to give us 2 weeks to finish it

14:10:02 [jo]

q+ to wonder if folks can contribute to this within 1 week?

14:10:23 [francois]

ack jo

14:10:23 [Zakim]

jo, you wanted to wonder if folks can contribute to this within 1 week?

14:10:28 [rob]

... 2nd option is just finish it then go last call in 2 weeks

14:10:50 [rob]

jo: dependshow quick we can get the examples together

14:11:39 [rob]

... or we could publish with one example and then expect comments back like "you need more examples!"

14:12:01 [rob]

... whilst secretly working on those

14:12:29 [rob]

... Would help if CTTF members each provide one example

14:12:55 [jo]

[would much prefer if we did what we meant and actually publish a final last call draft with all the examples we mean to include]

14:12:59 [SeanP]

q+

14:12:59 [rob]

francois: good idea to share load

14:13:05 [francois]

ack SeanP

14:13:14 [andrews]

q+

14:13:23 [rob]

SeanP: yes, happy to do an example

14:14:21 [rob]

AndrewS: can I have B4?

14:14:31 [rob]

SeanP: ok, i'll take B2

14:14:33 [francois]

ACTION: andrew to write some text for CT Appendix B.4

14:14:33 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-815 - Write some text for CT Appendix B.4 [on Andrew Swainston - due 2008-07-29].

14:14:52 [francois]

ACTION: Sean to write some text for CT Appendix B.2

14:14:52 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-816 - Write some text for CT Appendix B.2 [on Sean Patterson - due 2008-07-29].

14:16:08 [francois]

ACTION: rob to write some text for CT Appendix B.5

14:16:08 [trackbot]

Sorry, couldn't find user - rob

14:16:39 [francois]

ACTION: robert to write some text for CT Appendix B.5

14:16:39 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-817 - Write some text for CT Appendix B.5 [on Robert Finean - due 2008-07-29].

14:17:08 [francois]

ACTION: daoust to write some text for CT Appendix B.3

14:17:08 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-818 - Write some text for CT Appendix B.3 [on François Daoust - due 2008-07-29].

14:17:46 [rob]

francois: so please examples before Friday

14:18:09 [rob]

jo: Thursday evening is best, then I can get another draft out on Friday

14:18:25 [francois]

Topic: CT and direct choice of user experience

14:19:20 [jo]

q+

14:19:29 [rob]

francois: trying to rationalise the issue; from a technical viewpoint there is no inconsistency but might it confuse users?

14:19:34 [francois]

ack andrews

14:19:40 [francois]

ack jo

14:19:51 [francois]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2008Jul/0062.html ISSUE-270

14:19:52 [rob]

jo: suggest we drop this

14:20:19 [rob]

... there's not much we can say, so let's not try

14:21:04 [jo]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: ref ISSUE-270 3.1.5.3 and 3.2.3 drop these editorial notes

14:21:11 [rob]

+1

14:21:11 [francois]

+1

14:21:58 [SeanP]

+1

14:22:05 [rob]

RESOLUTION: ref ISSUE-270 3.1.5.3 and 3.2.3 drop these editorial notes

14:22:08 [francois]

Close ISSUE-270

14:22:17 [francois]

Topic: HTTPS link re-writing

14:22:27 [francois]

ACTION-813?

14:22:27 [trackbot]

ACTION-813 -- Heiko Gerlach to draft some clearer wording of 3.3.6.2 on HTTPS link re-writing -- due 2008-07-22 -- OPEN

14:22:27 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/813

14:22:55 [rob]

francois: Bryan had a lot of comments on this

14:23:25 [francois]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Jul/0011.html discussion

14:23:30 [rob]

... but we need to avoid prescribing workings, we just need to prescribe outcomes that are possible

14:24:16 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: amend text in 3.3.6.2 with some clarification that "to avoid decryption and transformation of the resources the links refer to" means that the CT-proxy must be bypassed in practice.

14:25:17 [jo]

q+ to disagree with the propsoed resolution and to suggest adding a note to stress that transformation is not possible without breaking end to end security

14:25:24 [francois]

ack jo

14:25:24 [Zakim]

jo, you wanted to disagree with the propsoed resolution and to suggest adding a note to stress that transformation is not possible without breaking end to end security

14:26:15 [andrews]

I agree with Jo

14:26:33 [rob]

jo: wants to avoid any doubt that "when content is transformed end-to-end security is broken"

14:26:44 [SeanP]

Agree, leave text as is

14:26:45 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: add a note in 3.3.6.2 that states that transformation is not possible without breaking end to end security

14:27:05 [andrews]

+1

14:27:08 [francois]

+1

14:27:39 [rob]

RESOLUTION: add a note in 3.3.6.2 that states that transformation is not possible without breaking end to end security

14:27:44 [jo]

ACTION: jo to add a note per resolution on CT 3.3.6.3 on end to end security

14:27:44 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-819 - Add a note per resolution on CT 3.3.6.3 on end to end security [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-07-29].

14:27:44 [francois]

Close ACTION-813

14:27:44 [trackbot]

ACTION-813 Draft some clearer wording of 3.3.6.2 on HTTPS link re-writing closed

14:27:59 [francois]

Topic: No mention of Content-Types in 3.3.6

14:29:07 [rob]

francois: I'm fine with the decision from several months ago

14:29:49 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Stick to our decision not to mention examples of Content-Types in 3.3.6

14:29:54 [rob]

jo: SeanP suggested Content-Type improvements that are in the forthcoming draft

14:30:13 [francois]

Close ACTION-812

14:30:13 [trackbot]

ACTION-812 Dig in the archives to check reason not to mention content types in the list of heuristics closed

14:30:37 [rob]

RESOLUTION: Stick to our decision not to mention examples of Content-Types in 3.3.6

14:30:47 [francois]

Topic: meta http-equiv note in 3.2.2

14:31:43 [francois]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: not to confuse readers, move the note on meta http-equiv from 3.2.2 to an appendix on legacy servers

14:31:55 [jo]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Drop note on meta http-equiv no-transform and move to appendix

14:32:13 [francois]

+1

14:32:18 [andrews]

+1

14:32:40 [SeanP]

+1

14:32:43 [rob]

RESOLUTION: Drop note on meta http-equiv no-transform and move to appendix

14:32:49 [francois]

Topic: Pagination and caching directives

14:32:57 [francois]

ACTION-811?

14:32:57 [trackbot]

ACTION-811 -- François Daoust to send a summary of the pagination note (3.1.4) to the mailing-list -- due 2008-07-22 -- PENDINGREVIEW

14:32:57 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/811

14:33:27 [rob]

francois: don't think there's need for mention of this

14:34:09 [jo]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Add a note stating that when a transforming proxy is serving stale content as a result of pagination (or for other reasons) it SHOULD note that the data is stale

14:34:23 [rob]

... we can either drop the section or add requirements that CT-proxy must cache it

14:34:59 [rob]

q+ to say real users don't understand this stuff

14:35:47 [francois]

ack rob

14:35:47 [Zakim]

rob, you wanted to say real users don't understand this stuff

14:35:49 [rob]

francois: but if i'm scrolling around a page on a browser I don't get informed when it turns stale

14:37:53 [jo]

_refresh_ for an up to date

14:37:56 [rob]

rob: i think we have to point out that the right thing to do is serve cached (and therefore likely stale)

14:37:56 [SeanP]

q+

14:38:07 [francois]

ack SeanP

14:38:22 [rob]

jo: still think we should point out they need to refresh to get the latest copy

14:39:07 [rob]

SeanP: maybe only do this if you reload the same section of the page?

14:41:57 [rob]

rob: likely to get this message a lot if cookies imply content is automatically stale

14:42:23 [rob]

jo: didn't mean that, only meant if Expires was set explicitly

14:43:00 [rob]

... this is a deviation from accepted HTTP

14:43:09 [SeanP]

q+

14:43:22 [rob]

q+ to say it's standard HTTP if the CT-proxy is a "virtual browser"

14:43:48 [jo]

q+ to say that we defined it as not being a "virtual browser"

14:44:10 [francois]

ack SeanP

14:44:17 [rob]

francois: if we're deviating from HTTP we should note that's the case

14:45:04 [andrews]

q+

14:45:07 [francois]

ack rob

14:45:07 [Zakim]

rob, you wanted to say it's standard HTTP if the CT-proxy is a "virtual browser"

14:45:09 [rob]

SeanP: tending to agree with Jo if I come back an hour later and go to sub-page 2 we should note it's old

14:46:08 [jo]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Introduce some text stating that for the purposes of consistent pagination proxies MAY serve stale data but when doing do SHOULD notify the user that this is the case and SHOULD provide a simple means of retrieving a fresh copy

14:47:00 [francois]

ack jo

14:47:00 [Zakim]

jo, you wanted to say that we defined it as not being a "virtual browser"

14:47:10 [rob]

rob: it's standard HTTP if the CT-proxy and handset are grouped together as a single "virtual browser" entity

14:47:13 [francois]

ack andrews

14:47:26 [rob]

jo: we haven't defined it like that though

14:48:13 [SeanP]

q+

14:49:00 [francois]

ack SeanP

14:49:01 [rob]

andrews: user-experience is that typically you find out content has expired when they hit back buttons, so maybe they will be used to such warnings

14:50:02 [rob]

... I think of CT-proxy as an extension of the origin server, not of the browser

14:50:44 [rob]

SeanP: if page does expire quickly they will get that message a lot

14:51:43 [rob]

jo: we're not prescribing a message, just noting they may be provided with a message and means to refresh

14:51:53 [jo]

+1

14:51:57 [francois]

0

14:52:00 [rob]

-1

14:52:06 [andrews]

0 (???)

14:52:10 [SeanP]

0, still thinking about it

14:52:14 [rob]

q+ to say MAY not SHOULD

14:52:21 [francois]

ack rob

14:52:21 [Zakim]

rob, you wanted to say MAY not SHOULD

14:53:31 [rob]

rob: prefer MAY not SHOULD

14:54:03 [rob]

jo: we could continue with SHOULD until implementations. If implementations show it's irritating, take it out

14:54:40 [jo]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Introduce some text stating that for the purposes of consistent pagination proxies MAY serve stale data but when doing do SHOULD notify the user that this is the case and SHOULD provide a simple means of retrieving a fresh copy - noting that from a process point of view it is a "feature at risk"

14:55:10 [rob]

francois: do we need to state this in the document?

14:55:12 [francois]

+1

14:55:18 [rob]

jo: no, just in the actions

14:55:38 [jo]

+1

14:56:22 [andrews]

q+

14:56:24 [rob]

0

14:56:26 [francois]

ack andrews

14:56:32 [SeanP]

Still 0, I like the "may" proposal

14:57:12 [jo]

q+ to point out to andrews ...

14:57:34 [rob]

andrews: I do see the logic of treating sub-pages as just scrolling

14:57:42 [rob]

... so prefer MAY to SHOULD

14:57:44 [francois]

ack jo

14:57:44 [Zakim]

jo, you wanted to point out to andrews ...

14:58:46 [rob]

jo: but paging where there's clearly comms with a remote server doesn't feel like just scrolling up and down

14:59:24 [rob]

... so believe we should give SHOULD a shot at implementation

14:59:57 [rob]

andrews: ok maybe for a last-call draft

15:00:19 [rob]

jo: to move from Candidate Rec to Rec must have implementations

15:00:38 [rob]

... so we'd find out the experience at that stage

15:00:49 [jo]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Introduce some text stating that for the purposes of consistent pagination proxies MAY serve stale data but when doing do SHOULD notify the user that this is the case and SHOULD provide a simple means of retrieving a fresh copy - noting that from a process point of view it is a "feature at risk"

15:00:54 [jo]

+1

15:00:58 [francois]

+1

15:01:03 [rob]

0

15:01:18 [andrews]

0

15:01:25 [SeanP]

0

15:01:37 [rob]

RESOLUTION: Introduce some text stating that for the purposes of consistent pagination proxies MAY serve stale data but when doing do SHOULD notify the user that this is the case and SHOULD provide a simple means of retrieving a fresh copy - noting that from a process point of view it is a "feature at risk"

15:03:22 [rob]

Topic: Link element section structure (3.2.3.2)

15:03:32 [rob]

jo: already addressesd in new draft

15:03:46 [rob]

... so I'll circulate new draft

15:04:00 [rob]

... and then we can finish this call on-time

15:04:47 [rob]

francois: ok, we'll see if next week we're ready for last call

15:05:09 [rob]

jo: yes, so I'll note that in the draft

15:05:50 [rob]

... So draft this afternoon, then everyone contribute Appendix B examples then final draft Friday

15:06:05 [Zakim]

-Francois

15:06:07 [Zakim]

-jo

15:06:19 [Zakim]

-SeanP

15:06:29 [Zakim]

-rob

15:06:47 [Zakim]

-andrews

15:06:49 [Zakim]

MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM has ended

15:06:53 [Zakim]

Attendees were Francois, rob, SeanP, jo, andrews

15:07:03 [francois]

RRSAgent, draft minutes

15:07:03 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/07/22-bpwg-minutes.html francois

15:09:02 [rob]

rob has left #bpwg

15:36:23 [francois]

RRSAGent, bye

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

I see 6 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/22-bpwg-actions.rdf :

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: andrew to write some text for CT Appendix B.4 [1]

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/22-bpwg-irc#T14-14-33

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Sean to write some text for CT Appendix B.2 [2]

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/22-bpwg-irc#T14-14-52

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: rob to write some text for CT Appendix B.5 [3]

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/22-bpwg-irc#T14-16-08

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: robert to write some text for CT Appendix B.5 [4]

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/22-bpwg-irc#T14-16-39

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: daoust to write some text for CT Appendix B.3 [5]

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/22-bpwg-irc#T14-17-08

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: jo to add a note per resolution on CT 3.3.6.3 on end to end security [6]

15:36:23 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/22-bpwg-irc#T14-27-44

15:36:29 [francois]

Zakim, bye

15:36:29 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #bpwg