IRC log of bpwg on 2008-09-23
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 13:57:54 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #bpwg
- 13:57:54 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/09/23-bpwg-irc
- 13:57:56 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 13:57:56 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #bpwg
- 13:57:58 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be BPWG
- 13:57:59 [trackbot]
- Meeting: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference
- 13:57:59 [trackbot]
- Date: 23 September 2008
- 13:57:59 [Zakim]
- ok, trackbot; I see MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
- 13:58:08 [francois]
- Chair: francois
- 13:58:14 [francois]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Sep/0053.html
- 13:58:26 [francois]
- Regrets: SeanP, jo
- 14:00:15 [francois]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 14:00:15 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/23-bpwg-minutes.html francois
- 14:01:33 [francois]
- zakim, code?
- 14:01:47 [Zakim]
- the conference code is 2283 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), francois
- 14:02:03 [rob]
- rob has joined #bpwg
- 14:02:07 [Zakim]
- MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM has now started
- 14:02:16 [Zakim]
- +Francois
- 14:03:03 [Zakim]
- +Bryan_Sullivan
- 14:03:14 [Zakim]
- + +0049211aaaa
- 14:03:32 [Zakim]
- + +0207287aabb
- 14:03:38 [hgerlach]
- hgerlach has joined #bpwg
- 14:03:43 [francois]
- zakim, aaaa is hgerlach
- 14:03:51 [Zakim]
- +hgerlach; got it
- 14:03:57 [francois]
- zakim, aabb is rob
- 14:04:05 [Zakim]
- +rob; got it
- 14:04:12 [Bryan]
- Bryan has joined #bpwg
- 14:05:03 [francois]
- ScribeNick: rob
- 14:05:06 [francois]
- Scribe: rob
- 14:06:27 [francois]
- ScribeNick: francois
- 14:06:31 [francois]
- Scribe: francois
- 14:06:35 [francois]
- Topic: New comments received
- 14:06:44 [francois]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-comments/2008JulSep/0154.html fd's no-comment comment
- 14:08:09 [tomhume]
- tomhume has joined #bpwg
- 14:08:14 [Zakim]
- + +0789972aacc
- 14:08:39 [francois]
- zakim, aacc is AndrewS
- 14:08:39 [Zakim]
- +AndrewS; got it
- 14:09:03 [francois]
- ScribeNick: Bryan
- 14:09:06 [hgerlach]
- http://cgi.w3.org/member-bin/irc/irc.cgi works
- 14:09:06 [francois]
- Scribe: Bryan
- 14:09:09 [rob]
- rob has joined #bpwg
- 14:09:16 [Zakim]
- + +0752568aadd
- 14:09:27 [tomhume]
- zakim, aadd is tomhume
- 14:09:28 [Zakim]
- +tomhume; got it
- 14:09:43 [francois]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-comments/2008JulSep/0152.html IAB message
- 14:09:47 [andrews]
- andrews has joined #bpwg
- 14:10:09 [Bryan]
- Francois: may be some comments coming from W3C internal review of the CT guidelines.
- 14:10:51 [francois]
- Topic: LC-2018: on the title
- 14:10:52 [Bryan]
- ... these offer W3C staff the chance to comment given they are very busy
- 14:11:16 [andrews]
- andrews has joined #bpwg
- 14:11:29 [francois]
- - Content Transformation Proxies: Guidelines
- 14:11:29 [francois]
- - Guidelines for Mobile Web Content Transformation Proxies
- 14:11:30 [Bryan]
- ... on the doc name, we can narrow the choice between two
- 14:11:58 [hgerlach]
- b) +1
- 14:12:20 [Bryan]
- ... we are more about web browsing than web, but browsing may be a confusing term to include; mobile web seems fine
- 14:12:28 [andrews]
- I favour the second
- 14:12:41 [francois]
- PROPOSED RESOLUTION: The title of the spec will be "Guidelines for Mobile Web Content Transformation Proxies"
- 14:12:48 [andrews]
- +1
- 14:12:51 [Bryan]
- q+
- 14:12:56 [francois]
- ack Bryan
- 14:13:49 [Bryan]
- Bryan: recommend to leave out mobile as this is whole web content
- 14:13:51 [andrews]
- Good point - I agree
- 14:14:00 [hgerlach]
- Guidelines for Content Transformation Proxies in Mobile Networks
- 14:14:01 [tomhume]
- +1
- 14:14:05 [andrews]
- +1
- 14:14:07 [hgerlach]
- -1
- 14:14:45 [Bryan]
- Heiko: proposes "in Mobile Networks"
- 14:15:15 [francois]
- PROPOSED RESOLUTION: The title of the spec will be "Guidelines for Web Content Transformation Proxies"
- 14:15:24 [francois]
- +1
- 14:15:29 [Bryan]
- Bryan: we are not limiting this to mobile networks; limited capability devices in general
- 14:15:37 [Bryan]
- +1
- 14:15:45 [andrews]
- +1
- 14:15:48 [hgerlach]
- +1
- 14:15:49 [tomhume]
- +1
- 14:15:50 [rob]
- +1
- 14:16:07 [Bryan]
- Francois: suggests we come to agreement to close this item as we could spend a lot of time on it
- 14:16:20 [Bryan]
- RESOLUTION: The title of the spec will be "Guidelines for Web Content Transformation Proxies"
- 14:16:27 [hgerlach]
- q+
- 14:16:33 [francois]
- ack hgerlach
- 14:16:50 [Zakim]
- -tomhume
- 14:17:10 [Bryan]
- Heiko: for new people, it may be hard to know that a key use case is in the mobile network context
- 14:17:38 [Bryan]
- Francois: the abstract of the title could include mobile and a proposal can be sent to the mailing list for that
- 14:17:41 [Zakim]
- +tomhume
- 14:17:46 [francois]
- Topic: LC-2025: On the quality and purpose of the doc
- 14:18:03 [francois]
- close ACTION-831
- 14:18:03 [trackbot]
- ACTION-831 Continue discussion of the title on the list closed
- 14:18:18 [francois]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Sep/0004.html heiko's comments
- 14:18:49 [Bryan]
- Francois: what can we resolve to do on this?
- 14:19:56 [Bryan]
- Heiko: this will come out of the whole comment resolution process; dont want to question the whole objective, this just provides general guidelines on how to improve the doc
- 14:20:17 [Bryan]
- Francois: we can include better examples and will come back to this in the end
- 14:20:20 [Zakim]
- -tomhume
- 14:20:21 [francois]
- Close ACTION-829
- 14:20:21 [trackbot]
- ACTION-829 Detail his thoughts arising from discussion of LC-2025 closed
- 14:20:37 [francois]
- Topic: LC-2012: clarification of the introduction
- 14:20:59 [francois]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Sep/0015.html Tom's proposal
- 14:21:46 [tomhume]
- Apologies all, I appear to have lost my telephone connection :(
- 14:21:57 [francois]
- "Within this document content transformation refers to the
- 14:21:57 [francois]
- manipulation of requests made to, and content delivered by, an origin
- 14:21:57 [francois]
- server. This manipulation is carried out by proxies with a view to
- 14:21:57 [francois]
- making content delivered more suitable for mobile presentation."
- 14:22:11 [Bryan]
- Francois: we should keep this for now, we do need to improve the intro, and can resolve to accept Tom's wording, about the 1st sentence of the intro
- 14:22:36 [Bryan]
- +1
- 14:23:03 [francois]
- PROPOSED RESOLUTION: re. LC-2012, use Tom's wording above, (and note we may have to further clarify the introduction for other reasons anyway)
- 14:23:14 [Bryan]
- +1
- 14:23:15 [francois]
- +1
- 14:23:28 [rob]
- +1
- 14:23:42 [hgerlach]
- +1
- 14:23:49 [Bryan]
- RESOLUTION: re. LC-2012, use Tom's wording above, (and note we may have to further clarify the introduction for other reasons anyway)
- 14:23:59 [Bryan]
- RESOLUTION: re. LC-2012, use Tom's wording above, (and note we may have to further clarify the introduction for other reasons anyway)
- 14:24:05 [francois]
- Topic: LC-2064: duplicated IDs in the document
- 14:24:41 [Bryan]
- Francois: this one is a mistake; a bug in firefox
- 14:24:46 [francois]
- PROPOSED RESOLUTION: LC-2064 is a mistake. There are no duplicated IDs in the document.
- 14:24:56 [Bryan]
- +1
- 14:25:02 [Bryan]
- RESOLUTION: LC-2064 is a mistake. There are no duplicated IDs in the document.
- 14:25:10 [francois]
- Topic: LC-2003: no mention of whitelists
- 14:25:29 [francois]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Sep/0026.html jo's proposal
- 14:25:52 [Zakim]
- +tomhume
- 14:26:15 [francois]
- PROPOSED RESOLUTION: re. LC-2003, stick to our position and use Jo's proposed response in public-bpwg-ct/2008Sep/0026.html
- 14:26:26 [hgerlach]
- -1
- 14:26:44 [Bryan]
- Francois: the essence is that this is an internal proxy issue
- 14:27:06 [Bryan]
- Heiko: don't agree, but can accept a team agreement
- 14:27:32 [Bryan]
- q+
- 14:27:38 [francois]
- ack Bryan
- 14:28:12 [rob]
- q+ to support Heiko's point that whitelists do exist - and won't go away just because we don't mention them
- 14:29:04 [Bryan]
- Bryan: we can consider content management interfaces through other specifications or fora, e.g. OMA
- 14:29:18 [Bryan]
- Bryan: OMA is working on content management interfaces for example
- 14:29:51 [Bryan]
- Francois: agree that new technologies may be needed, if there is some clear work going on, we can mention it in the appendix
- 14:30:05 [francois]
- ack rob
- 14:30:05 [Zakim]
- rob, you wanted to support Heiko's point that whitelists do exist - and won't go away just because we don't mention them
- 14:30:57 [Bryan]
- Rob: there is talk of mechanisms, but CP's are aware of the need to be on whitelists, so it is strange that we don't mention it in more detail
- 14:31:50 [Zakim]
- -tomhume
- 14:31:56 [Bryan]
- Francois: the rationale is that it is not needed for our guidelines, and is just the internal processing of proxies; we could add a note mentioning whitelists
- 14:32:28 [Bryan]
- Rob: a note should tell CP to contact the network operator if they are having trouble
- 14:32:32 [hgerlach]
- q+
- 14:32:53 [Bryan]
- Bryan: should be called the "proxy operator"
- 14:33:39 [francois]
- ack hgerlach
- 14:33:39 [Bryan]
- Francois: we could note that whitelist require CPs to submit some request to manage their handling
- 14:33:56 [Bryan]
- Rob: it should be the proxy operator who takes the action
- 14:35:14 [Bryan]
- Heiko: the diverging views here indicate the need for clarity; the history of this is that the use of lists in the proxy were to prevent adaptation; the same concept can be applied to user-agents
- 14:36:53 [Bryan]
- Heiko: the only issue left is that 200 OK pages; for dedicated URL we see issues with 200 OK instead of 406; human launguage guidance of incompatibility cannot be used semantically and thus we need whiltelists
- 14:38:06 [Bryan]
- Francois: proposes someone take an action to propose text so we can try to get agreement on it
- 14:39:15 [hgerlach]
- q+
- 14:39:30 [Bryan]
- Bryan: we could just list the types of functions that could be controlled by whitelists in tyhe document and leave the details out
- 14:40:36 [Bryan]
- Bryan: we can just list the functions e.g. don't modify this user agent or that site
- 14:40:51 [francois]
- ack hgerlach
- 14:40:57 [Bryan]
- Francois: the listing of the functions is where the opinion divergence happens
- 14:41:10 [Zakim]
- +tomhume
- 14:42:04 [Bryan]
- Heiko: we had another item about the manipulation of other headers as well; we can expand the user-agent mod control whitelist text (if we had it) to include other headers as well
- 14:42:49 [Bryan]
- Francois: the relationship between whitelists and headers is unclear
- 14:43:06 [Bryan]
- Heiko: to control the changing of the user agent for specific pages
- 14:43:40 [rob]
- q+ to say we don't want to go into too much detail
- 14:43:45 [francois]
- ack rob
- 14:43:45 [Zakim]
- rob, you wanted to say we don't want to go into too much detail
- 14:43:46 [Bryan]
- ... the decision on whether the UA is changed should be the site provider's
- 14:44:35 [Bryan]
- Rob: we should not go into too much detail about the purpose of the controls; just note that there may be functions that control the automatic behavior
- 14:45:47 [Bryan]
- Bryan: I can try to provide some more generic text that will hopefully be useful
- 14:45:48 [francois]
- ACTION: Bryan to provide some text on whitelists to see if we can include them somehow and come to an agreement re. LC-2003
- 14:45:48 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-850 - Provide some text on whitelists to see if we can include them somehow and come to an agreement re. LC-2003 [on Bryan Sullivan - due 2008-09-30].
- 14:46:16 [francois]
- Topic: LC-2068: on requests that contain Cache-Control: no-transform directives
- 14:46:27 [francois]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Sep/0029.html Jo's proposal
- 14:48:04 [francois]
- "If the request contains a Cache-Control:
- 14:48:04 [francois]
- no-transform directive proxies must follow HTTP sections 14.9.5 and
- 14:48:04 [francois]
- 13.5.2."
- 14:48:26 [Bryan]
- Francois: HTTP RFC talks about presence of the cache control header; we need to improve the clarity of the text and would like to hear proposals for that
- 14:48:43 [Bryan]
- ... text in the CT guidelines of course...
- 14:48:50 [andrews]
- I think that we should leave the text unchanged.
- 14:49:20 [francois]
- "If the request contains a Cache-Control: no-transform
- 14:49:20 [francois]
- directive proxies must forward the request unaltered to the server,
- 14:49:20 [francois]
- other than to comply with transparent HTTP behaviour and as noted
- 14:49:20 [francois]
- below."
- 14:50:18 [Bryan]
- Francois: we could clarify the "as noted below" part.
- 14:50:29 [francois]
- "If the request contains a Cache-Control: no-transform directive proxies must forward the request unaltered to the server, other than to comply with transparent HTTP behavior and as noted below (see 4.1.6 Additional HTTP Headers)"
- 14:51:13 [Bryan]
- Andrew: would not suggest any changes; it would probably just make it less clear
- 14:51:54 [Bryan]
- Francois: we could ref the transparent HTTP behavior, but the whole spec is assumed to be on top of HTTP anyway
- 14:51:58 [francois]
- PROPOSED RESOLUTION: re. LC-2068, we think the text is as clear as possible. Stick to the text in the spec.
- 14:52:15 [andrews]
- +1
- 14:52:16 [francois]
- +1
- 14:52:18 [Zakim]
- -tomhume
- 14:52:21 [Bryan]
- +1
- 14:52:23 [hgerlach]
- +1
- 14:52:24 [rob]
- +1
- 14:52:28 [Bryan]
- RESOLUTION: re. LC-2068, we think the text is as clear as possible. Stick to the text in the spec.
- 14:52:39 [francois]
- Topic: LC-2008: on use of Vary header
- 14:52:48 [francois]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Sep/0030.html Jo's proposal
- 14:53:31 [tomhume]
- Apologies to all, I'm unable to keep a mobile signal here and am about to lose net.connection :(
- 14:53:51 [francois]
- "If a server varies its representation according to examination of
- 14:53:51 [francois]
- received HTTP headers then it must include a Vary HTTP header indicating
- 14:53:51 [francois]
- the headers it examines in accordance with [ref].
- 14:53:51 [francois]
- "
- 14:54:05 [Bryan]
- Francois: The text is too long and thus obscure; Jo proposes to simplify the text
- 14:54:22 [francois]
- Current text: "If a server varies its representation according to examination of
- 14:54:22 [francois]
- received HTTP headers then it must include a Vary HTTP header indicating
- 14:54:22 [francois]
- this to be the case. If, in addition to, or instead of HTTP headers, a
- 14:54:22 [francois]
- server varies its representation based on other factors (e.g. source IP
- 14:54:22 [francois]
- Address) then it must, in accordance with [RFC 2616
- 14:54:23 [francois]
- HTTP]<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/#ref-HTTP>,
- 14:54:25 [francois]
- include a Vary header containing the value '*'.
- 14:54:27 [francois]
- "
- 14:55:01 [Bryan]
- Francois: fine with Jo's proposal; we don't need to restate the RFC; readers can go there to get details
- 14:55:08 [andrews]
- Agree
- 14:55:13 [francois]
- PROPOSED RESOLUTION: re. LC-2008, update the text according to Jo's proposal, as pasted above
- 14:55:17 [andrews]
- +1
- 14:55:20 [rob]
- +1
- 14:55:21 [francois]
- +1
- 14:55:35 [Bryan]
- RESOLUTION: re. LC-2008, update the text according to Jo's proposal, as pasted above
- 14:57:02 [francois]
- Topic: LC-2090, LC-2091 on headers/footers
- 14:57:14 [francois]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Sep/0038.html Heiko's proposal
- 14:58:36 [Bryan]
- Heiko: adpated pages could include headers/footers, for non-adapted pages we should not add these
- 14:58:59 [Bryan]
- Francois: these should be out ot scope of the document; there were comments on copyright issues
- 14:59:02 [Bryan]
- q+
- 14:59:13 [francois]
- ack Bryan
- 14:59:49 [rob]
- q+ to agree that just because it's possible does not mean it's recommended
- 15:00:17 [francois]
- ack rob
- 15:00:17 [Zakim]
- rob, you wanted to agree that just because it's possible does not mean it's recommended
- 15:00:28 [Bryan]
- Bryan: we should leave this off the table
- 15:00:59 [francois]
- PROPOSED RESOLUTION: re. LC-2090, leave headers/footers off the table. Out of scope of this document.
- 15:01:10 [Bryan]
- rob: agree that just because it's possible does not mean it's recommended
- 15:01:18 [hgerlach]
- -1
- 15:04:03 [francois]
- linked to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Sep/0004.html
- 15:04:19 [Bryan]
- Heiko: with RC-2025, we discussed changes related to request for more details; now we are being less specific
- 15:05:09 [hgerlach]
- ok, bye
- 15:05:13 [Bryan]
- Francois: suggests that people think about this over the list in the meantime
- 15:05:24 [Zakim]
- -hgerlach
- 15:05:26 [Zakim]
- -Bryan_Sullivan
- 15:05:30 [Zakim]
- -rob
- 15:05:32 [Zakim]
- -AndrewS
- 15:05:34 [Zakim]
- MWI_BPWG(CTTF)10:00AM has ended
- 15:05:35 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Francois, Bryan_Sullivan, +0049211aaaa, +0207287aabb, hgerlach, rob, +0789972aacc, AndrewS, +0752568aadd, tomhume
- 15:06:32 [francois]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 15:06:32 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/23-bpwg-minutes.html francois
- 15:08:27 [rob]
- rob has left #bpwg
- 17:23:03 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #bpwg