IRC log of bpwg on 2008-09-02

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:53:38 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #bpwg

13:53:38 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-irc

13:53:40 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs public

13:53:40 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #bpwg

13:53:42 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be BPWG

13:53:42 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot; I see MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes

13:53:43 [trackbot]

Meeting: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference

13:53:43 [trackbot]

Date: 02 September 2008

13:54:03 [jo]

Chair: Jo

13:54:19 [jo]

Regrets: Francois, HGerlach

13:56:23 [Pontus]

Pontus has joined #bpwg

13:58:36 [Pontus]

Pontus has joined #bpwg

14:00:01 [jo]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Sep/0000.html

14:00:25 [jo]

zakim, code?

14:00:26 [Zakim]

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

14:01:01 [Zakim]

MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM has now started

14:01:05 [Zakim]

+ +46.3.17.47.aaaa

14:01:11 [Zakim]

+jo

14:01:15 [Zakim]

-jo

14:01:17 [Zakim]

+jo

14:01:27 [Pontus]

zakim, 46.3.17.47.aaaa is me

14:01:40 [Zakim]

sorry, Pontus, I do not recognize a party named '46.3.17.47.aaaa'

14:01:48 [Pontus]

zakim, +46.3.17.47.aaaa is me

14:01:53 [jo]

zakim, aaaa is pontus

14:01:56 [Zakim]

+Pontus; got it

14:02:02 [Zakim]

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

14:02:06 [SeanP]

SeanP has joined #bpwg

14:02:11 [Zakim]

+[Vodaphone]

14:02:35 [jo]

regrets- HGerlach

14:03:01 [jo]

zakim, Vodaphone is really Vodafone

14:03:01 [Zakim]

+Vodafone; got it

14:03:02 [rob]

rob has joined #bpwg

14:03:13 [hgerlach]

hgerlach has joined #bpwg

14:03:16 [jo]

zakim, Vodafone holds HGerlach

14:03:27 [Zakim]

+HGerlach; got it

14:03:38 [jo]

zakim, who is here?

14:03:41 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Pontus, jo, Vodafone

14:03:47 [Zakim]

Vodafone has HGerlach

14:03:55 [Zakim]

On IRC I see hgerlach, rob, SeanP, Pontus, Zakim, RRSAgent, jo, matt, trackbot, dom

14:04:03 [Zakim]

+rob_finean

14:04:33 [Zakim]

+Bryan_Sullivan

14:05:21 [Zakim]

+SeanP

14:05:44 [francois]

francois has joined #bpwg

14:05:53 [hgerlach]

+1

14:06:57 [jo]

scribe: rob

14:07:19 [jo]

-> http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/ LC Comment Tracker

14:07:33 [rob]

Topin: Comments on Last Call of CT Guidelines

14:07:52 [rob]

s/Topin/Topic/

14:08:25 [rob]

Jo: Starting at LC-2043

14:08:35 [jo]

Topi:c LC-2043

14:08:53 [jo]

s/Topi:c/Topic:/

14:12:20 [matt]

Present- Matt

14:15:27 [rob]

jo: Mark is editor of HTTP and makes some formal comments including LC-2043

14:16:17 [Bryan]

Bryan has joined #bpwg

14:16:23 [rob]

... saying decide if this is Guidelines or Protocol - can't be both

14:16:43 [rob]

s/Mark is/Mark Nottingham is/

14:17:33 [SeanP]

q+

14:17:36 [Bryan]

q+

14:18:23 [rob]

SeanP: agrees with Jo's sentiments that most of the document is guidelines

14:18:35 [jo]

s/Mark Nottingham is/Mark Nottingham also/

14:18:59 [jo]

s/some formal comments including/a comment similar to/

14:19:00 [rob]

... we're echoing common practise rather than specifying a protocol

14:20:16 [rob]

Bryan: but mentioning common practise is kind of recommending it as a protocol

14:20:53 [rob]

jo: I could take on submitting this to other groups to become a protocol?

14:20:55 [jo]

ACTION: Jo to get back on LC-2043 and simialr pointing out what we are trying to achieve and asking for clarification

14:20:55 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-828 - Get back on LC-2043 and simialr pointing out what we are trying to achieve and asking for clarification [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-09-09].

14:21:42 [jo]

s/I could take on submitting this to other groups to become a protocol?/I could take this back to the comments list .../

14:23:04 [rob]

... but I think guidelines are as far as we want to go with this document - definitely not a protocol definition

14:25:06 [jo]

Topic: LC-2025

14:25:24 [rob]

hgerlach: we call the document guidelines but as LC-2025 says, there is little guidance for Eduardo

14:26:03 [jo]

ACTION: HGerlach to detail his thoughts arising from discussion of LC-2025

14:26:03 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-829 - Detail his thoughts arising from discussion of LC-2025 [on Heiko Gerlach - due 2008-09-09].

14:27:23 [rob]

jo: point of the document is not to explain transcoding but to provide a framework so the parties can understand and control what happens

14:27:36 [Bryan]

q+

14:27:42 [hgerlach]

will we agree the responses before sending it out?

14:27:52 [SeanP]

q-

14:27:54 [jo]

ack sean

14:28:24 [jo]

s/explain transcoding/prevent egregious behaviour/

14:28:25 [SeanP]

q+

14:28:32 [jo]

ack b

14:28:36 [rob]

Bryan: this is a summary comment, there are more comments later that define specifics

14:28:38 [jo]

ack sean

14:28:56 [rob]

SeanP: would it be easier to hit the specific comments 1st?

14:29:38 [rob]

jo: maybe, but good to see them in tracker's order in overview

14:30:06 [rob]

... skippong LC-2075

14:30:07 [jo]

http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/

14:30:23 [rob]

Topic: LC-2065

14:30:39 [rob]

s/pong/ping/

14:30:50 [jo]

-> http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/2065 LC-2065

14:31:24 [rob]

Jo: I did respond to Dennis on this informally

14:32:02 [rob]

Bryan: I'd like to review Jo's response and follow up

14:32:40 [jo]

ACTION: Bryan to review correspondence with Dennis cf LC-2065 and to draft a) proposed changes to the document and b) a proposed response to Dennis

14:32:40 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-830 - Review correspondence with Dennis cf LC-2065 and to draft a) proposed changes to the document and b) a proposed response to Dennis [on Bryan Sullivan - due 2008-09-09].

14:33:12 [rob]

... I'll follow up on the public list

14:33:28 [rob]

Topic: LC-2018

14:33:31 [jo]

Topic: LC-2018

14:33:38 [jo]

-> http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/2018 LC-2018

14:34:20 [rob]

jo: This is about the document's title

14:34:45 [SeanP]

q+

14:34:56 [jo]

ack Sean

14:35:20 [rob]

SeanP: there is a good point here, but I still don't know what to change the title to!

14:35:29 [Bryan]

q+

14:35:38 [jo]

ack bryan

14:36:02 [rob]

Bryan: we'd call this "Content Adaptation" rather than "Content Transformation"

14:36:49 [rob]

... but capturing the fact that you are adapting for a limited browser might be useful in the title

14:37:39 [rob]

jo: but "Content Adaptation" is commonly used as an origin-server technology already

14:37:40 [jo]

Content Transformation by Proxies?

14:37:43 [hgerlach]

q+

14:37:45 [SeanP]

HTTP proxies?

14:38:10 [rob]

hgerlach: we don't change the content, we change the layout

14:38:10 [jo]

ack Hg

14:38:45 [rob]

... not convinced we need to change the title

14:39:17 [hgerlach]

+1

14:39:52 [jo]

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Change the title of the document to: Content Transformation by HTTP Proxies: Guidelines

14:40:09 [hgerlach]

how about transducer instead???

14:40:40 [SeanP]

How about "Guidelines for Content Transformation by HTTP Proxies?

14:41:03 [rob]

jo: given importance of "no-transform", transformation must be the right word

14:42:12 [rob]

Bryan: is the word Guidelines essential?

14:42:19 [rob]

jo: maybe not

14:43:23 [hgerlach]

How about orientation guide?

14:43:54 [rob]

SeanP: move Guidelines to a subtitle like "Guidelines for content providers, network operators and ..."

14:43:57 [jo]

ACTION: SeanP to continue discussion of the title on the list

14:43:57 [trackbot]

Sorry, couldn't find user - SeanP

14:44:13 [jo]

ACTION: Patterson to continue discussion of the title on the list

14:44:39 [jo]

Topic: LC-2066

14:44:49 [SeanP]

Another suggestion: Content Transformation by HTTP Proxies: Guidelines for CT Operators and Content Providers

14:45:17 [jo]

(assigned to Jo)

14:45:19 [rob]

jo: I'll respond to this

14:46:02 [jo]

Topic: LC-2050

14:46:56 [rob]

jo: we do distinguish between these but don't make much use of the definitions

14:47:13 [SeanP]

q+

14:47:18 [rob]

... and may be difficult to define it formally

14:47:49 [jo]

ack seanp

14:48:24 [rob]

SeanP: possibility we could remove them? It's tricky to define formally

14:48:52 [rob]

jo: would anybody like to see what the impact of removing the definitions is?

14:49:00 [rob]

SeanP: yes, I'll do that

14:49:24 [jo]

ACTION: Patterson to look at what the impact on the document would be if we removed the definitions referred to in LC-2050

14:49:24 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-832 - Look at what the impact on the document would be if we removed the definitions referred to in LC-2050 [on Sean Patterson - due 2008-09-09].

14:50:31 [jo]

Topic: LC-2003

14:50:54 [Bryan]

q+

14:52:09 [rob]

Bryan: in considering language around "user-control" I'll wait until Jo responds to LC-2003 before elaborating on this

14:52:29 [jo]

ACTION: Jo to propose text against LC-2003 referring to the TF's earlier discussions about not referring to a Proxy's internal operation

14:52:29 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-833 - Propose text against LC-2003 referring to the TF's earlier discussions about not referring to a Proxy's internal operation [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-09-09].

14:53:05 [hgerlach]

hgerlach has joined #bpwg

14:54:23 [rob]

Topic: LC-2034

14:54:36 [hgerlach]

what is left????

14:54:44 [rob]

jo: does anyone have particular views?

14:55:32 [rob]

... what's left are OPTIONS and random extensions like WebDAV methods

14:55:41 [rob]

q+

14:55:56 [jo]

ack bryan

14:56:33 [SeanP]

OPTIONS, CONNECT, TRACE, DELETE

14:57:12 [rob]

rob: we don't do anything to other methods

14:57:24 [jo]

ACTION: Rob to draft a response to LC-2034 noting that the scope of CT as we mean it is limited to those methods

14:57:24 [trackbot]

Sorry, couldn't find user - Rob

14:57:38 [jo]

ACTION: Finean to draft a response to LC-2034 noting that the scope of CT as we mean it is limited to those methods

14:57:39 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-834 - Draft a response to LC-2034 noting that the scope of CT as we mean it is limited to those methods [on Robert Finean - due 2008-09-09].

14:58:55 [jo]

Topic: AOB

14:59:10 [rob]

jo: I'll chat with Francois when he's back about dividing the comments up - because we've made good progress today but finishing will take a long time at this rate

14:59:25 [hgerlach]

OK, bye

14:59:29 [Zakim]

-jo

14:59:30 [Zakim]

-Pontus

14:59:32 [Zakim]

-Bryan_Sullivan

14:59:34 [Zakim]

-Vodafone

14:59:37 [Zakim]

-SeanP

14:59:42 [Zakim]

-rob_finean

14:59:43 [Zakim]

MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM has ended

14:59:45 [Zakim]

Attendees were jo, Pontus, HGerlach, rob_finean, Bryan_Sullivan, SeanP

14:59:58 [jo]

RRSAgent, make minutes

14:59:58 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-minutes.html jo

15:08:07 [jo]

s/also editor of HTTP and //

15:08:17 [jo]

rssagent, draft minutes

15:08:46 [jo]

zakim, bye

15:08:46 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #bpwg

15:08:58 [jo]

rssagent, help

15:11:12 [matt]

rrsagent, draft minutes

15:11:12 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-minutes.html matt

15:13:09 [jo]

rrsagent, bye

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

I see 9 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-actions.rdf :

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Jo to get back on LC-2043 and simialr pointing out what we are trying to achieve and asking for clarification [1]

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-irc#T14-20-55

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: HGerlach to detail his thoughts arising from discussion of LC-2025 [2]

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-irc#T14-26-03

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Bryan to review correspondence with Dennis cf LC-2065 and to draft a) proposed changes to the document and b) a proposed response to Dennis [3]

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-irc#T14-32-40

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: SeanP to continue discussion of the title on the list [4]

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-irc#T14-43-57

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Patterson to continue discussion of the title on the list [5]

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-irc#T14-44-13

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Patterson to look at what the impact on the document would be if we removed the definitions referred to in LC-2050 [6]

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-irc#T14-49-24

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Jo to propose text against LC-2003 referring to the TF's earlier discussions about not referring to a Proxy's internal operation [7]

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-irc#T14-52-29

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Rob to draft a response to LC-2034 noting that the scope of CT as we mean it is limited to those methods [8]

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-irc#T14-57-24

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Finean to draft a response to LC-2034 noting that the scope of CT as we mean it is limited to those methods [9]

15:13:09 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-bpwg-irc#T14-57-38