Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference

 

 

<trackbot> Date: 11 December 2008

caja

<Adam> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/BestPractices-2.0/ED-mobile-bp2-20081210

<scribe> Scribe: Dan

<scribe> ScribeNick: DKA

Mobile Web Application Best Practices

DKA: We are trying to put together a public draft before the 18th.

Adam: As the doc stands, I've got ed notes where I have work to do.
... I'll send out a new draft on Monday. That will be the draft where we say "please read this so we can take a resolution on Thursday."
... a couple of open questions.
... in Section 1.3, we discussed adding an extra section that calls out device device capabilities/information that you need.
... Dan you suggested a preamble. Someone else suggested 3.1.6...
... to recap, we have a section that says what the scope is, that these BPs rely on some knowledge of the device...

Brian: Overall at this high level, the goal is to make clear what delivery context is.
... to introduce the knowledge of delivery context.

Dan: Yes and then the specific data points (knowledge you need to have) could be put into an appendix.

Adam: OK.

ack

Adam: Not sure whether we came to a conclusion on section 3.6.1 and 3.6.2 -
... Dan you raised a concern that recommending server-side capability detection could be controversial.
... differentiating between capabilities and properties...

Bryan: it's really properties in both cases...
... would like to hear more from Dan about server-side capability detection.

Dan: Don't think it's an issue.

Adam: would be good to pin down wording.
... I think you've got 2 BPs ... need to be aligned...

Bryan: It's the device that knows its current state primarily. There are unspecified means to get device state from the network. The most we can say is that on the network side you can collect information about the device's static capabilities.

Adam: As opposed to dynamic capabilities - information about dynamic state.

Bryan: In a year or 2 when DDrs are widely available and include dynamic info as well then people can begin to [use this information...]

Dan: Any other issues?

Adam: SVG best practices?
... I transcribed what Abel proposed - Abel's proposals seem to have a lot of overlap with general BPs. I've eliminated some of these from Abel's draft.
... it's come down to 3 BPs. I don't know enough about SVG to feel strongly about them. We need to iterate a bit more on these.

Dan: I can raise that as an issue on the next hypertext coordination working group call.

Adam: The rest is just extra editorial changes I haven't yet done - so open to feedback.

Bryan: in general the latest draft looks good - we're close to a last call.
... in general we might want to expand where you have telephone numbers clickable you might want to expand that to commonly used interaction mechanisms (e.g. email addresses, etc...)

Adam: Makes sense...

Dan: Although telephone numbers are specific to the mobile context due to people using the mobile web on phones...

<Sangwhan_Moon> WTAI?

Bryan: If we wanted to say anything more generically we could say to make addresses actionable.
... wrt WTAI, yes in general we can say that standardized URI schemes like WTAI could be used...

<Sangwhan_Moon> Okay, understood.

Dan: Yes but I think we should have a separate BP about use of tel:
... Suggest adding an editorial note.

Adam: cool.
... there is a new section on terminology - take a look at that (1.5) and see if you agree with the wording there.

Ok - suggest we close the call then.

Dan: We need to celebrate our success as well with the publication of MobileOK as a Rec. !!

All: YAY!