13:27:12 RRSAgent has joined #bpwg 13:27:12 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/03/17-bpwg-irc 13:27:14 RRSAgent, make logs public 13:27:14 Zakim has joined #bpwg 13:27:16 Zakim, this will be BPWG 13:27:16 ok, trackbot; I see MWI_BPWG()9:30AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes 13:27:17 Meeting: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference 13:27:17 Date: 17 March 2009 13:27:39 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Mar/0112.html 13:27:41 Chair: jo 13:28:45 Regrets: adam, abel, miguel, manrique 13:29:30 zakim, code? 13:29:30 the conference code is 2794 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), jo 13:30:03 MWI_BPWG()9:30AM has now started 13:30:10 + +0208995aaaa 13:30:21 +francois 13:30:22 zakim, aaaa is me 13:30:23 +jo; got it 13:30:59 +??P2 13:31:04 zakim, ??P2 is me 13:31:04 +tomhume; got it 13:31:33 rob has joined #bpwg 13:32:18 +Bryan_Sullivan 13:32:37 Bryan has joined #bpwg 13:32:53 +rob 13:34:22 EdC has joined #bpwg 13:34:34 +??P6 13:34:41 zakim, ??P6 is yeliz 13:34:41 +yeliz; got it 13:35:07 zakim, mute yeliz 13:35:07 yeliz should now be muted 13:35:10 +dstorey 13:36:20 ack tom 13:36:31 Scribe: tomhume 13:36:34 ScribeNick: tomhume 13:36:48 Topic: F2F London 25-27 March 13:36:56 -> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Meetings/London3/logistics.html F2F agenda 13:37:40 jo: Idea is to spend Wednesday on MWABP, Thursday on CT, tidying up on Friday 13:37:56 ... including tidying up remaining mobile accessibility issues, checker library, etc. 13:38:12 zakim, unmute yeliz 13:38:12 yeliz should no longer be muted 13:38:44 yeliz: will be there on Friday 13:38:56 zakim, mute yeliz 13:38:56 yeliz should now be muted 13:39:22 jo: we have mobileOK scheme 13:39:34 francois: not heard from Rigo, hope to have something by the F2F 13:39:44 Regrets+ Dom 13:39:48 jo: need to ping Korean folks for a written update 13:39:52 three questions about the agenda: (1) are the times indicated local UK time? (2) any detailed schedule? (3) numbers for teleconference? 13:40:51 bryan: I shan't be there in person, conf call bridge would be good. 13:41:17 ACTION: JO to talk to Adam about getting a conf bridge set up for f2f 13:41:17 Created ACTION-915 - Talk to Adam about getting a conf bridge set up for f2f [on Jo Rabin - due 2009-03-24]. 13:41:39 francois: will ping Rigo 13:42:08 q+ 13:42:26 ack ed 13:42:36 jo: times of the agenda are in GMT 13:43:04 zakim, who is making noise? 13:43:06 -yeliz 13:43:16 jo, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: jo (30%), francois (47%) 13:43:29 SeanP has joined #bpwg 13:43:38 -francois 13:44:29 +SeanP 13:44:35 Topic: mobileOK Checker - discussion of file: scheme URIs 13:45:18 +francois 13:45:26 jo: Adam's issued 2 new drafts for MWABP 13:46:09 +??P8 13:46:14 zakim, ??P8 is yeliz 13:46:14 +yeliz; got it 13:46:25 zakim, mute yeliz 13:46:25 yeliz should now be muted 13:46:28 zakim, mute yeliz 13:46:28 yeliz was already muted, jo 13:47:14 francois: the mobileOK checker libraries only apply to HTTP/HTTPS URI schemes. There could be a useful use case where you want to run tests on a file. Most web content is local before it's published. 13:47:28 sorry about the echo, it seems like there is something wrong with my connection today :( 13:47:46 ...you might want to check it before you publish it. Some of the tests do not mean anything outside of HTTP(S), some do and are useful - e.g. page size 13:49:00 ...Yeliz can probably talk about it, I wanted to update the checker library and add the possibility to check files. We've discussed a little on the checker mailing lists and have some ideas for how to add support for file:// URIs. It would mean that the library contains code that is not defined in the standard, in particular an additional test outcome ("CANNOTTELL") 13:49:45 ...but it's not mobileOK if it's not in the standard, as Jo has pointed out. The Java library is supposed to be a reference implementation of the standard, so I don't know if we can extend it with something outside of the standard. 13:50:22 ...We wanted to get the WGs opinion. Do we need to duplicate the code and work on a separate version of the library? Or can we incorporate the changes and add file:// scheme support to the library? 13:50:37 q+ why not run a local server (http://localhost) instead - this is easy? 13:50:38 ... We might want to issue another document explaining how to test file:// 13:51:04 q+ to why not run a local server (http://localhost) instead - this is easy? 13:51:07 Can you parameterize the library with a switch for "standard mobileOK" and "development mode"? Via a configuration file, for instance? 13:51:44 ... I think it's useful for us to go ahead with this. Abel proposed to write the WG Note. I'm not sure we need to do this. 13:51:52 jo: I agree 13:51:56 ack b 13:51:57 Bryan, you wanted to why not run a local server (http://localhost) instead - this is easy? 13:52:27 bryan: a consistent scheme is a good idea. All you can do with file:// is check a static page, which isn't very common in terms of real live applications 13:52:48 jo: the point about mobileOK is that it tests the operation of your server when serving content - i.e. in the real world. 13:52:56 bryan: that's my point 13:53:04 ack yeli 13:53:07 zakim, unmute yeliz 13:53:07 yeliz was not muted, yeliz 13:54:15 yeliz: we want to combine the mobileOK library with another for validating documents. It would be good to use some of the mobileOK tests with local files. This could be used for other people (e.g. designers) wanting to check documents before they upload them. e.g. the HTML validator lets you upload and validate a doc. 13:54:49 ... you can't do all the tests, but a CANNOTTELL would accommodate this. 13:55:18 zakim, mute yeliz 13:55:18 yeliz should now be muted 13:55:46 ack y 13:56:15 zakim, mute yeliz 13:56:15 yeliz should now be muted 13:56:24 sorry about the echo:( 13:56:54 -tomhume 13:56:57 q+ 13:57:30 question: is the file:// scheme used in some Web applications to access the local storage? 13:57:38 jo: wondering if there is a way of leaving the reference implementation intact and dealing with file: scheme by subclassing? 13:58:05 +??P11 13:58:38 zakim, ??p11 is tomhume 13:58:38 +tomhume; got it 13:58:40 fyi I have to go on IRC only for the next hour - will be back asap 13:59:18 tomhume has joined #bpwg 13:59:29 ack f 14:00:13 francois: I had the same idea - we could do this without altering the ref. implementation. There are a couple of things we can do, but it can't be done completely by subclassing. 14:00:39 question: is the file:// scheme used in some Web applications to access the local storage? If yes, shouldn't the scheme be dealt with in the test harness? 14:00:44 ...I would like to keep the ref. implementation clean 14:00:52 -Bryan_Sullivan 14:01:30 ed: if file:/// is used by web applications, the harness should handle it surely? 14:01:45 jo: mobileOK only tests http(s) URIs 14:03:36 ACTION: daoust to prepare some material for F2F identifying what changes would be needed to the mobileOK checker to allow subclassing for file: scheme handling 14:03:36 Created ACTION-916 - Prepare some material for F2F identifying what changes would be needed to the mobileOK checker to allow subclassing for file: scheme handling [on François Daoust - due 2009-03-24]. 14:04:11 jo: if XXXX would like to write a note, we'd be happy for them to do it 14:04:29 s/XXXX/Miguel and Nacho/ 14:04:30 francois: maybe we should make sure they're not working on something we might abandon first... 14:04:48 zakim, unmute yeliz 14:04:48 yeliz should no longer be muted 14:04:58 s/Miguel and Nacho/Abel, Miguel and Nacho/ 14:05:11 yeliz: what's involved in writing a note about this? 14:05:19 zakim, mute yeliz 14:05:19 yeliz should now be muted 14:05:33 14:05:46 jo: the idea would be to write a WG Note (informative doc, not recommendation) pointing out the differences in the tests 14:06:04 yes, thanks 14:06:06 :) 14:06:20 Topic: CT Guidelines New Version 14:06:43 jo: new version posted on Friday 13th. Francois has noted some typos - thankyou - and there are lots of outstanding issues, which I've yet to post. 14:06:44 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Mar/0103.html CT announcement by Jo 14:06:53 ... these will hopefully get out today/soon 14:07:11 ... unless anyone has anything to say about this now, we should defer til next week 14:07:29 ... (at the F2F). Sean, Rob? You may want to comment on HTTPS link rewriting or link rewriting 14:07:31 q+ 14:07:40 ack s 14:07:42 rob: happy to keep that for the list 14:07:48 seanP: I need to look it over a bit 14:08:40 jo: hoping to resolve this issue (the main outstanding one, tho there are others we need to go back on, in particular Eduardo's point re changing/replacing headers) 14:08:53 ed: happy to deal with this and the other topics next week 14:09:01 [I note I'll have a bit to report on X-Device-headers next week based on a discussion with IETF] 14:10:33 jsmanrique has joined #bpwg 14:11:29 francois: are you thinking we misunderstood what a document reference is? 14:11:47 s/document reference/same-document reference 14:11:48 jo: either I've misunderstood what they mean or it doesn't quite work 14:12:27 Topic: BP Addendum - Next Steps 14:12:31 jeffs has joined #bpwg 14:12:36 jo: the poll said no-one was happy for it to advance to a WG Note 14:13:07 ... so there's more work to do. Kai's not on the call today. I've scheduled half a days editorial session on this on Friday pm 14:13:15 ... we need to check Kai will be there for that 14:13:58 +??P55 14:14:14 zakim, P55 is jeffs 14:14:14 sorry, jeffs, I do not recognize a party named 'P55' 14:14:26 jo: the November questionnaire hasn't been answered much 14:14:28 q+ 14:14:30 zakim, ??P55 is jeffs 14:14:30 +jeffs; got it 14:14:39 ack f 14:14:41 francois: we only have 1 day left to answer the poll 14:14:49 jo, post the questionairre link please 14:15:07 jo: wondering if more folks can attend the F2F if it's not in San Diego 14:15:29 I prefer San Diego! 14:15:31 ... can we reopen this questionnaire with the additional answer "I could attend if it's elsewhere" 14:15:56 +berrueta 14:15:57 "if it's elsewhere" is really a bit vague. Most answers will be "I do not know"... 14:16:22 q+ 14:16:34 ack jo 14:17:03 jo: if we're to extend the charter we need another F2F. It'll either need to be there, or somewhere else. 14:19:05 action: daoust to extend the TPAC Noc Questionnaire and add a question to assess whether the meeting would be better attended if it was held somewhere else 14:19:05 Created ACTION-917 - Extend the TPAC Noc Questionnaire and add a question to assess whether the meeting would be better attended if it was held somewhere else [on François Daoust - due 2009-03-24]. 14:19:36 jo: there won't be a call next Tuesday because of the F2F and we don't usually have calls post-F2F unless someone wants one. So no call on 31.03 14:19:58 You mean 7th of April... 14:20:03 ... We will be back to normal time for everyone on 7 April. 14:20:17 Topic: AOB 14:20:44 jo, can you post the questionairre link, I can't find it on the BPWG homepage 14:20:47 -jo 14:20:48 -SeanP 14:20:48 -tomhume 14:20:48 bye 14:20:49 -rob 14:20:53 -francois 14:20:53 quit 14:20:54 rob has left #bpwg 14:20:55 -yeliz 14:20:56 -jsmanrique 14:20:59 oh well 14:21:00 -jeffs 14:21:02 bye 14:21:06 bryan - francois will re-post to the list 14:21:18 -dstorey 14:21:20 MWI_BPWG()9:30AM has ended 14:21:21 Attendees were +0208995aaaa, francois, jo, tomhume, Bryan_Sullivan, rob, yeliz, dstorey, SeanP, jeffs, jsmanrique 14:21:22 and will update the WG home page to link to it, yes. 14:21:57 RRSAgent, draft minutes 14:21:57 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/03/17-bpwg-minutes.html francois 14:34:09 Sangwhan_Moon has joined #bpwg 14:40:26 MWI_BPWG()9:30AM has now started 14:40:33 +Kai_Dietrich 14:42:20 -Kai_Dietrich 14:42:21 MWI_BPWG()9:30AM has ended 14:42:21 Attendees were Kai_Dietrich 14:42:55 Sangwhan_Moon has left #bpwg 15:01:03 RRSAgent, bye 15:01:03 I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/17-bpwg-actions.rdf : 15:01:03 ACTION: JO to talk to Adam about getting a conf bridge set up for f2f [1] 15:01:03 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/17-bpwg-irc#T13-41-17 15:01:03 ACTION: daoust to prepare some material for F2F identifying what changes would be needed to the mobileOK checker to allow subclassing for file: scheme handling [2] 15:01:03 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/17-bpwg-irc#T14-03-36 15:01:03 ACTION: daoust to extend the TPAC Noc Questionnaire and add a question to assess whether the meeting would be better attended if it was held somewhere else [3] 15:01:03 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/17-bpwg-irc#T14-19-05 15:01:06 Zakim, bye 15:01:06 Zakim has left #bpwg