13:01:57 RRSAgent has joined #bpwg 13:01:57 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-bpwg-irc 13:01:59 RRSAgent, make logs public 13:01:59 Zakim has joined #bpwg 13:02:01 Zakim, this will be BPWG 13:02:01 ok, trackbot; I see MWI_BPWG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 58 minutes 13:02:02 Meeting: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference 13:02:02 Date: 04 September 2008 13:02:14 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-bpwg/2008Sep/0000.html 13:02:58 Regrets: Francois, Rob, Abel, Heiko, Ignacio, Yeliz 13:03:00 Chair: DKA 13:50:02 jeffs has joined #bpwg 13:53:27 Regrets+ Ed 13:53:30 Regrets+ Scott 13:57:20 DKA has joined #bpwg 14:01:14 MWI_BPWG()10:00AM has now started 14:01:21 +??P26 14:01:25 +??P27 14:01:41 zakim, ??P26 is jeffs 14:01:43 +jeffs; got it 14:01:54 Bryan has joined #bpwg 14:02:11 zakim, code? 14:02:17 the conference code is 2794 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), dom 14:02:29 jsmanrique has joined #bpwg 14:02:46 +Bryan_Sullivan 14:02:55 dstorey has joined #bpwg 14:03:04 +DKA 14:03:11 Pontus has joined #bpwg 14:03:12 zakim, who's here? 14:03:12 On the phone I see ??P27, jeffs, Bryan_Sullivan, DKA 14:03:15 On IRC I see Pontus, dstorey, jsmanrique, Bryan, DKA, jeffs, Zakim, RRSAgent, matt, trackbot, dom 14:03:46 I was also having trouble with Zakim today. 14:03:51 Managed after 3rd attempt. 14:03:52 achuter has joined #bpwg 14:04:16 +Pontus 14:04:26 +dom 14:04:47 zakim, who's on the call? 14:04:47 On the phone I see ??P27, jeffs, Bryan_Sullivan, DKA, Pontus, dom 14:05:33 zakim, ??P27 is DaveRooks 14:05:35 +DaveRooks; got it 14:05:39 zakim, who's here? 14:05:39 On the phone I see DaveRooks, jeffs, Bryan_Sullivan, DKA, Pontus, dom 14:05:40 On IRC I see achuter, Pontus, dstorey, jsmanrique, Bryan, DKA, jeffs, Zakim, RRSAgent, matt, trackbot, dom 14:05:52 +nacho 14:05:59 jo has joined #bpwg 14:06:09 zakim, code? 14:06:09 the conference code is 2794 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), jo 14:06:12 Zakim: nacho is me 14:06:23 Zakim, nacho is me 14:06:24 +jsmanrique; got it 14:06:36 Zakim, miguel is with me 14:06:36 +miguel; got it 14:06:46 +??P49 14:07:04 +jo 14:07:05 zakim, ??P49 is me 14:07:05 +achuter; got it 14:07:05 zakim, ??P49 is achuter 14:07:05 I already had ??P49 as achuter, dom 14:07:14 zakim, who's here? 14:07:14 On the phone I see DaveRooks, jeffs, Bryan_Sullivan, DKA, Pontus, dom, jsmanrique, achuter, jo 14:07:17 jsmanrique has jsmanrique, miguel 14:07:18 On IRC I see jo, achuter, Pontus, dstorey, jsmanrique, Bryan, DKA, jeffs, Zakim, RRSAgent, matt, trackbot, dom 14:07:47 zakim, mute me 14:07:47 jeffs should now be muted 14:08:04 zakim, who's making noise? 14:08:15 DKA, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Bryan_Sullivan (19%), DaveRooks (23%), dom (14%) 14:08:21 zakim, mute daverooks 14:08:23 DaveRooks should now be muted 14:08:30 zakim, mute bryan_sullivan 14:08:30 Bryan_Sullivan should now be muted 14:08:37 zakim, mute dom 14:08:37 dom should now be muted 14:08:44 zakim, who's here 14:08:44 DKA, you need to end that query with '?' 14:08:46 zakim, who's here? 14:08:46 On the phone I see DaveRooks (muted), jeffs (muted), Bryan_Sullivan (muted), DKA, Pontus, dom (muted), jsmanrique, achuter (muted), jo 14:08:49 jsmanrique has jsmanrique, miguel 14:08:50 On IRC I see jo, achuter, Pontus, dstorey, jsmanrique, Bryan, DKA, jeffs, Zakim, RRSAgent, matt, trackbot, dom 14:09:05 scribe: jo 14:09:50 I'm 3/4s reading...trying to get wikipedia to fix a broken handheld stylesheet 14:10:19 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-bpwg/2008Sep/0000.html 14:11:27 Topic: Status of SIgn Up to New Group 14:11:27 ack dom 14:11:37 zakim, mute me 14:11:37 jo should now be muted 14:12:13 http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/37584/discrepancies 14:12:14 dom: Reminders went out over the weekend, if you have not been nominated by 13 Spet you will be kicked out of the working group 14:12:41 ... so those in the link above need to ping their ac reps 14:12:48 -achuter 14:12:56 dka: how many outstanding? 14:13:38 dom: before re-chartering we had 33 member orgs, but now we only have 11, so we have 22 missing 14:13:45 dka: ugh 14:13:47 +Kai_Dietrich 14:14:38 dom: in a certain number of cases this is for people that have not been active - anyway I expect this will sort itself out 14:15:04 dka: make sure you don't miss out on member benefits! 14:15:26 +??P0 14:15:40 suggestion for F2F: Mobile Web for Social Development Interest Group is nowup and running (I am member), & F2F happening at TPAC... do we want to see if there are mutually supportive things can be done?? 14:15:41 zakim, ??P40 is me 14:15:41 I already had ??P40 as ??P40, achuter 14:15:42 Topic: F2F Agenda for Mandelieu 14:15:47 suggestion for F2F: Mobile Web for Social Development Interest Group is nowup and running (I am member), & F2F happening at TPAC... do we want to see if there are mutually supportive things can be done?? 14:16:12 dka: I sent a link to a "list of goals" in the agenda 14:16:36 ... I would just like to run through those goals and see what people think and have other to contribute 14:17:09 ... jo and I thought that we wanted to have a substantial discussion on CT and move to second last call 14:17:39 ... ref accessibility we want to have everything done and dusted, and possibly a joint session with EOWG 14:17:56 ... ref BP2 we want to have discussion leading to a last call 14:18:20 ... that is a bit tentative but we do need to move along and I want to make this the focus of the meeting 14:18:33 ... for BP 1.5 we need to move this to a draft 14:19:05 ... we want to hear from the the Korean Task force and understand the Gap Analysis document that they are working on, but not sure what Korean plans are for attending 14:19:20 -> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2008/registrants#mwbp MWBP registrants at TPAC 14:19:28 ... we should have a POWDER presentation from Phil 14:19:33 [Jonathan Jeon and Kangchan Lee will be there] 14:19:35 suggestion for F2F: Mobile Web for Social Development Interest Group is nowup and running (I am member), & F2F happening at TPAC... do we want to see if there are mutually supportive things can be done?? 14:20:32 ... and a joint session with EO, as discussed, and with the Webapps people on Widgets - we need to establish that a mobile widget needs to be conformant with BP (2.0) 14:20:53 ... so we need an agreement on how we can reference their work and/or vice-versa 14:21:07 suggestion for F2F: Mobile Web for Social Development Interest Group is now up and running (I am member), & F2F happening at TPAC... do we want to see if there are mutually supportive things can be done?? 14:21:07 ... and the otehr thing is having a BP Dinner on Monday night 14:21:21 s/otehr/other/ 14:21:36 dom: may be we need a session with the TAG ref ISSUE-222 14:21:41 Kai has joined #bpwg 14:22:01 zakim, who is on the phone? 14:22:01 On the phone I see DaveRooks (muted), jeffs (muted), Bryan_Sullivan (muted), DKA, Pontus, dom, jsmanrique, jo (muted), Kai_Dietrich, ??P0 14:22:03 jsmanrique has jsmanrique, miguel 14:22:08 ... could spend time on MobileOK Scheme, but a lesser goal than the others 14:22:11 suggestion for F2F: Mobile Web for Social Development Interest Group is now up and running (I am member), & F2F happening at TPAC... do we want to see if there are mutually supportive things can be done?? 14:22:27 Stephane Boyera stephane@w3.org is MW4D contact 14:22:30 zakim, Kai_Dietrich is me 14:22:30 +Kai; got it 14:22:57 dka: right jeffs, maybe we could have a presentation from Stephane? 14:22:59 would you like to contact steph? or me? 14:23:28 dom: yes makes sense to see if their is useful input, and I will ask him 14:23:37 s/their/there/ 14:23:43 ACTION: Dom to contact Stéphane to see if he is interested in presenting MW4D to BPWG at TPAC 14:23:43 Created ACTION-835 - Contact Stéphane to see if he is interested in presenting MW4D to BPWG at TPAC [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2008-09-11]. 14:23:44 zakim, who's here? 14:23:44 On the phone I see DaveRooks (muted), jeffs (muted), Bryan_Sullivan (muted), DKA, Pontus, dom, jsmanrique, jo (muted), Kai, ??P0 14:23:46 jsmanrique has jsmanrique, miguel 14:23:47 On IRC I see Kai, jo, achuter, Pontus, dstorey, jsmanrique, Bryan, DKA, jeffs, Zakim, RRSAgent, matt, trackbot, dom 14:23:53 jo: nothing further to add 14:24:28 dka: so we'll come back with a concrete agenda, and Dom, any suggestions for a venue for Monday night? 14:25:12 ACTION: Dom to look into a restaurant for Monday night at TPAC - due 2008-10-01 14:25:12 Created ACTION-836 - look into a restaurant for Monday night at TPAC [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2008-10-01]. 14:25:13 ... but contrary to Jo's wishes we might have to go back tot he pizza place at Mandelieu and it is where we first made the Wikipedia entry onMobile Web (from a mobile phone) 14:25:29 Topic: CT Task FOrce 14:25:31 ack me 14:26:03 SeanP has joined #bpwg 14:26:55 jo: had meeting this week and are starting to address lc comments 14:27:07 Topic: Checker Task FOrce 14:27:25 miguel: No specific news from us 14:27:42 Topic: BP 1.5 14:27:50 dka: how does it feel for you Kai? 14:28:02 kai: we are waiting for feedback from the group 14:28:03 +SeanP 14:28:10 ... as I mentioned last time 14:28:35 rrsagent, make minutes 14:28:35 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-bpwg-minutes.html jo 14:28:51 http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/mobileOKPro/drafts/ED-mobileOK-pro10-tests-20080731 14:29:05 dka: shall we discuss this a bit more than we did last time, like what changes have gone in since last f2f 14:29:19 q+ 14:29:23 ack me 14:29:26 kai: no that would be futile, people just need to read it, 14:29:59 dom: I did look at the format and it looks OK, might need minor tweaks to make pubrules compliant 14:30:18 ... the real work is in turning it into the addendum rather than mobileOK pro as it is today 14:30:32 dks: so what si that work then 14:30:37 s/si/is/ 14:30:46 s/dks/dka/ 14:31:12 How about mobileOK Basic Tests Addendum? 14:31:24 ... right now it looks more like an addendum to the Basic Tests and I am struggling with what we'd need to do to turn it into the addendum we need 14:31:47 q+ 14:31:55 ... don't we need an awful lot more text and explanatory verbiage (sic) 14:32:02 ack jai 14:32:18 kai: I think it is an addendum to the test doc 14:32:32 ... we even ahve a preface saying that these are the human testable bits 14:32:33 "Testing Mobile Web Best Practices"? 14:33:03 ... we could do these tests as an addendum, and we could add "why will you want to do this" 14:33:09 agree, from "Abstract": "This document outlines a set of tests requiring human evaluation" 14:33:20 ... that is the only thing that is really needed to make that happen 14:33:30 q+ 14:33:35 ack jo 14:33:37 ack kai 14:33:38 ack me 14:34:25 seems to me useful to make addendum to tests as it is the part that requires human intervention 14:34:53 q+ to say we need someone to lead the work 14:35:02 zakim, mute me 14:35:02 jo should now be muted 14:35:43 jo: well we did say that it would be re-purposed as an addendum to BP 1 but it would probably be just as useful if we said its an addendum to mobileOK and less work 14:35:58 q? 14:36:01 dka: well, yes, that's what I am saying 14:36:04 ack me 14:36:05 dom, you wanted to say we need someone to lead the work 14:36:12 how about "mobileOK Basic Tests - with human interaction" 14:36:18 +1 14:36:36 dom: I think that as a title we should have testing mobile web best practices 14:36:42 s/interaction/intervention 14:36:51 -??P0 14:36:59 ... the scope is very different to mobileOK 14:37:14 ... not sure if Kai is available to do this 14:37:41 ... at the moment we don't have anyone responsible so I don't see it moving forward 14:37:45 dka: what? 14:37:45 q? 14:38:07 dom: what I said is that we need an editor who makes a proposal for how to move forward 14:38:16 dka: that is Kai surely? 14:38:22 q+ 14:38:23 Present- Matt 14:38:38 dom: well Kai said he's done but if he is able to move it forward? 14:38:49 ack kai 14:38:58 dka: kai suggested some text so why don't we do that and move forward 14:39:31 kai: I can make the changes but I have been beating my head on a brick wall and it won't move forward without group input 14:39:55 ... I can provide text for the new context but I need guidance on what to do 14:40:07 ... need directed feedback and I will implement that 14:40:20 PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Regarding BP 1.5 - new document title is "Additional Tests for Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0". 14:40:51 suggestion: add to title "Requiring Human Intervention"?? 14:41:01 dom: I can understand your frustration at the lack of feedback ... from my perspective the current draft is a long way from what we discussed in June, which is an addendum discussing further testing on BP 14:41:15 achuter has joined #bpwg 14:41:34 ... I'd expect a bit more proposals on the new title and a bit more re-organisation 14:41:51 kai: the document was completely re-worked as a result of your feedback 14:42:06 [The sections "Note to BPWG:" need to disappear] 14:42:18 ... made lots of suggestions but we need to decide on it 14:42:27 +??P0 14:42:34 zakim, ??PO is me 14:42:34 sorry, achuter, I do not recognize a party named '??PO' 14:42:39 zakim, ??P0 is me 14:42:39 +achuter; got it 14:42:53 ... no decisions made at sofia on what I was supposed to do, I will do the work if I am told what to do 14:43:12 want me to read through this weekend and email suggestions for text-content?? (not another issue pls ) 14:43:37 dom: one of the things I would have expected is an ISSUE on the new title and we need to have a discussion on it - independent of review 14:43:49 kai: that seems less important to me than discussion of the content 14:43:51 q+ 14:43:57 ack me 14:43:57 ack jo 14:45:10 Abstract seems to establish scope: "This document outlines a set of tests requiring human evaluation"... am I wrong? 14:45:13 ISSUE: What is the new name of document, currently called "mobileOK Pro Tests Version 1", which is supposed to be an addendum to the Best Practices document, to be? 14:45:13 Created ISSUE-272 - What is the new name of document, currently called \"mobileOK Pro Tests Version 1\", which is supposed to be an addendum to the Best Practices document, to be? ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/272/edit . 14:46:04 given what the abstract says, how about establishing "human intervention req'd" as the scope?? 14:46:08 ISSUE: Is the mobileOK Pro Tests document supposed to be an addendum to the Best Practices document or to the Basic Tests document? 14:46:08 Created ISSUE-273 - Is the mobileOK Pro Tests document supposed to be an addendum to the Best Practices document or to the Basic Tests document? ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/273/edit . 14:46:26 jo: I think that before we do anything else we need to make sure that we have precised its purpose and that we make sure we are clear whether we are doing "a useful clarifications on BP 1.0" or a "here are some handy tests" the former is what I thought we agreed in Sophia 14:46:50 ISSUE: Which texts are missing from the addendum that are needed to turn it into an addendum? 14:46:50 Created ISSUE-274 - Which texts are missing from the addendum that are needed to turn it into an addendum? ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/274/edit . 14:47:20 dka: think that the bits on "what's additional" needs to be separated from "what to test" 14:48:04 given what the abstract says, how about establishing "human intervention req'd" as the scope?? 14:48:11 ... material that is clarification of BP 1.0 can be pulled out into a separate section, if we did that it would make it a lot mroe coherent 14:48:19 s/mrow/more/ 14:48:38 kai: we set out to fill the gaps and provide human tests, 14:48:56 dka: I am not referring to human vs computer 14:49:08 ... in BP 1.0 there are sections that say "what to test" 14:49:31 ... we don't need to emphasize the human vs, machine tests 14:50:05 achuter: if this is an addendum to the best practices then ... [sorry missed it] 14:50:41 the tests would cover the BP 1.0 and the addendum 14:50:41 achuter: then the basic tests will be the tests and the addendum? 14:52:02 dka: anything in BP 1.5 that is not a test can be pulled out as a clarification on BP 1.0 - everything else can remain as a set of additional tests which can be considered as addenda to the "how to test it" bit in BP 1.0 14:53:05 kai: there are some sections in there - we tried to provide bracketing so that people running different tests would come up with the same answers - like how many links on the same page - that can certainly be pulled out as additional information 14:53:39 ... so the test bit is sometimes quite intuitive and clear and I am not sure it helps to pull that out, 14:54:34 ... notes to bp, limitations of the tests, interpretation of the best practices, differences to mobileOK basic tests, procedures and examples, not sure if this is useful as every bp is covered comprehensively 14:54:44 q+ 14:54:54 ack jo 14:55:53 q+ 14:56:11 jo: need to move on 14:56:24 ack kai 14:56:30 zakim, mute me 14:56:30 dom should now be muted 14:56:35 ... suggest first step is to make sure we agree with content, then decide whether to move it around 14:56:57 dka: need some actions, need specific things to make sure people review 14:57:28 [well, it's not exactly how to apply the BP to improve their content, but how to check whether they indeed apply the BP, isn't it?] 14:57:31 kai: think we just need to add some explanatory text that heps people understand that this will help them make better content 14:57:52 dka: if we get no feedback by next week we take a resultion to publish as a draft 14:58:19 kai: I will take an action to write explanatory text and see how we like it 14:58:25 topic: BP 2.0 14:58:39 ack bry 14:58:46 dka: adam is not on call, bryan, any comment on status 14:59:25 ACTION: Kai to provide explanatory text for the addendum which will put the document (mobileOK Pro Tests 1) in the correct context and explain to the audience that it is intended to aid content authors in creating still better content. 14:59:25 Created ACTION-837 - Provide explanatory text for the addendum which will put the document (mobileOK Pro Tests 1) in the correct context and explain to the audience that it is intended to aid content authors in creating still better content. [on Kai Scheppe - due 2008-09-11]. 14:59:45 bryan: current draft has a number of areas where further input is requested - not clear what adn why we are looking for some of the feedback 14:59:49 -> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-mwabp-20080729/ MWABP 15:00:08 ... been reviewing and there are some things I'd like to put back from what was in earlier drafts 15:00:26 ... think that some of the input was already there but has been removed 15:01:20 ... useful doc and developing well, but I'd like to see it get back to a degree of detail and contextual rationale in the the interests of being terse but I don't know that serves the reader or the developers who will read it 15:02:11 dka: partly as a result of your not being at last F2F, perhaps there can be an editorial workshop between now and next F2F 15:03:03 bryan: yes an editorial conference call would be useful (note that I will not be in Cannes) 15:03:14 dka: maybe we can do a video link? 15:03:37 bryan: [c is for] conference call, that's good enough for me 15:03:57 dka: I will take an action to organise an editorial meeting 15:04:24 ... yada yada I am so busy, um, 15:04:32 ... week after next 15:04:32 grrr 15:05:45 bryan: we need to consider also the response from Webapps to our contribution on Widget requirements and so we may need to fill that gap in our document 15:06:23 dka: we need to nail down where the gap is between what they are doing and what is needed 15:06:34 ... think they are looking at mobile first 15:07:15 bryan: specifically they are not addressing capability negotiation and disclosure - we did a bunch of stuff in DDWG which is being ignored 15:07:33 ... basically they are ignoring the need for content adaptation technologies 15:07:57 [I think the WebApps WG is focusing on *packaging* of Widgets, not any deeper than that at this time] 15:08:03 ... which is fine so long as you are looking at closed client server like applications, rather than open web 15:08:29 ... so either we need to deal with it or we need to convince them that they need to put it into their requirements 15:08:33 q+ 15:08:34 [well, maybe not...] 15:08:46 dka: we need to make the input 15:08:59 bryan: we did so and it was rejected 15:09:11 ack jo 15:09:16 dka: well maybe we need to get back to them 15:10:57 jo: we did discuss this last week, we decided at that point that we had made our contribution and that we had probably done enough 15:11:22 dka: well if bryan takes an action, then maybe we would have more to discuss with them 15:11:41 ACTION: Bryan to summarise points to take back to the WebApps group 15:11:41 Created ACTION-838 - Summarise points to take back to the WebApps group [on Bryan Sullivan - due 2008-09-11]. 15:12:10 ACTION: Dan to arrange BP 2.0 editorial meeting to fit in with his hectic globe trotting schedule 15:12:10 Created ACTION-839 - Arrange BP 2.0 editorial meeting to fit in with his hectic globe trotting schedule [on Daniel Appelquist - due 2008-09-11]. 15:12:49 bryan: I kind of agree with Jo that the best way to address this might be for us just to add the material to our stuff 15:13:06 dka: I am a bit worried that we don't really want to dive to deeply into eidget specific stuff 15:13:18 s/eidget/widget/ 15:13:40 q+ to remidn dan that Dom has something 15:13:43 q+ to talk about mobileOK 15:13:48 q- 15:14:07 Topic: Accessibility - coordination etc. 15:15:03 achuter: the mapping document has been dragging on for a long time and been through lots of versions - feedback has finished so there is not much else to do 15:15:12 http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/ED-mwbp-wcag-20080901/Overview.html 15:15:23 ... I'd like someone to check it, but have checked it myself 15:16:24 http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/ED-mwbp-wcag-20080901/together.html 15:16:30 ... I think we can sign it off as there not being anything else we can do, needs more work on the WCAG side, but the section references may change and may need review on publication of WCAG 2.0 15:17:22 ... there is also a question about what to do about the document referring to what to do if you want to do WCAG 2 and BP - whether to leave it as it or to make an empty document 15:17:52 dka: don't we need another draft before we put it into limbo 15:18:17 achuter: no major changes some minor stuff 15:18:25 ack me 15:18:26 dom, you wanted to talk about mobileOK 15:18:36 dom: no comments 15:18:41 q+ to talk about mobileOK 15:19:58 dom: both groups just need to publish the douments as a group note. that's all 15:20:27 achuter: just need to resolve the "doing both" issue 15:20:48 ... but think it is stable as is 15:21:04 s/just need to/just need to agree to/ 15:21:14 q? 15:21:14 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-bpwg/2008Sep/0004.html 15:21:17 dka: we'll try to take that resolution next week 15:21:18 ack me 15:21:18 dom, you wanted to talk about mobileOK 15:21:19 ack dom 15:21:32 Topic: mobileOK 15:21:39 -achuter 15:22:07 dom: late last call comment from WSC on mobileOK which we need to respond to and integrate into the document 15:23:06 ... also next step for mobileOK basic is to wait to complete implementation report for Google to become mobileOK basic conformant. 15:23:25 ... so should we revisit the decision to wait or should we go ahead 15:23:44 dka: think it would be better to have google quoted 15:24:24 dom: to clarify fd has been working with them, and I think we should time-box waiting any longer 15:24:48 dka: let's wait for fd to get back and make a decision next week once he has feedback 15:24:52 ACTION: Dom to work with francois on getting a schedule on getting google.com mobileOK basic 15:24:52 Created ACTION-840 - Work with francois on getting a schedule on getting google.com mobileOK basic [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2008-09-11]. 15:25:34 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-comments/2008JulSep/0137.html comment https in mobileOK from WSC WG 15:26:39 [yoohoo, another editors version of mobileOK coming!] 15:26:44 jo: don't have objection to the WSC wording which I agree is more accurate 15:26:57 -Pontus 15:26:58 -Bryan_Sullivan 15:27:01 -Kai 15:27:03 -dom 15:27:05 quit 15:27:06 -SeanP 15:27:08 zakim, drop me 15:27:08 jo is being disconnected 15:27:09 -jo 15:27:11 bye 15:27:14 -jsmanrique 15:27:18 -DaveRooks 15:27:35 ACTION: JO to review WSC comment and propose new wording 15:27:36 Created ACTION-841 - Review WSC comment and propose new wording [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-09-11]. 15:27:56 zakim, who is here? 15:27:56 On the phone I see jeffs (muted), DKA 15:27:58 On IRC I see SeanP, Kai, jo, dstorey, jsmanrique, Zakim, RRSAgent, matt, trackbot, dom 15:28:06 zakim, drop jeffs, dka 15:28:06 I don't understand 'drop jeffs, dka', jo 15:28:18 zakim, drop jeffs 15:28:18 jeffs is being disconnected 15:28:19 -jeffs 15:28:23 zakim, drop dka 15:28:23 DKA is being disconnected 15:28:25 MWI_BPWG()10:00AM has ended 15:28:27 Attendees were jeffs, Bryan_Sullivan, DKA, Pontus, dom, DaveRooks, jsmanrique, miguel, jo, achuter, Kai, SeanP 15:29:01 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:29:01 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-bpwg-minutes.html jo 15:29:58 zakim, bye 15:29:58 Zakim has left #bpwg 15:32:42 s/tot he/to the/ 15:33:24 s/even ahve a preface/even have a preface 15:34:38 s/made at sofia on what/made at Sophia on what 15:35:28 jo, I sent the minutes already 15:35:29 s/mroe coherent/more coherent 15:35:35 I'll make these corrections in the online version 15:35:36 ergh 15:35:43 RRSAgent, bye 15:35:43 I see 7 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-bpwg-actions.rdf : 15:35:43 ACTION: Dom to contact Stéphane to see if he is interested in presenting MW4D to BPWG at TPAC [1] 15:35:43 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-bpwg-irc#T14-23-43 15:35:43 ACTION: Dom to look into a restaurant for Monday night at TPAC - due 2008-10-01 [2] 15:35:43 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-bpwg-irc#T14-25-12 15:35:43 ACTION: Kai to provide explanatory text for the addendum which will put the document (mobileOK Pro Tests 1) in the correct context and explain to the audience that it is intended to aid content authors in creating still better content. [3] 15:35:43 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-bpwg-irc#T14-59-25 15:35:43 ACTION: Bryan to summarise points to take back to the WebApps group [4] 15:35:43 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-bpwg-irc#T15-11-41 15:35:43 ACTION: Dan to arrange BP 2.0 editorial meeting to fit in with his hectic globe trotting schedule [5] 15:35:43 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-bpwg-irc#T15-12-10 15:35:43 ACTION: Dom to work with francois on getting a schedule on getting google.com mobileOK basic [6] 15:35:43 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-bpwg-irc#T15-24-52 15:35:43 ACTION: JO to review WSC comment and propose new wording [7] 15:35:43 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-bpwg-irc#T15-27-35 15:35:52 s|s/mrow/more/||