See also: IRC log
DKA: do we still have a WG?
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-bpwg/2009Jul/0001.html FD's announcement of charter extension
francois: charter extension approved until the end of the year!
dka: happy to exist.
... question about calls during summer period. I'll be away end
of July beginning of August.
... That does not necessarily entail we need to cancel the
calls.
<EdC> Should we poll people present?
francois: Yes, I'll be away next two weeks.
dka: I just want to avoid having a call scheduled and people end up waiting for other participants to join.
<EdC> I have no plans to be absent in the coming 5 weeks.
<jo> /me is away from July 29 to Aug 17
dka: Francois, do you think you can set up a poll?
francois: sure. One thing is that if Jo and Dan are both away, we should cancel the corresponding call(s). BPWG can't survive without chairs.
<DKA> ACTION-986?
<trackbot> ACTION-986 -- François Daoust to enquires as to status of CSS Media Queries Rec -- due 2009-07-07 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/986
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jul/0009.html Status of CSS media queries
dka: let's start with ACTION-986 on francois
ACTION-986?
<trackbot> ACTION-986 -- François Daoust to enquires as to status of CSS Media Queries Rec -- due 2009-07-07 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/986
francois: the important point is
that the CSS media queries spec is not blocked for lack of
implementations.
... There are some in mobile browsers although not in all
browsers, for sure.
... It really depends on what we want to put in the best
practices.
<EdC> Shouldn't the BP have a caveat regarding the implementation of various query elements, i.e. "device-width" vs. "color" or "orientation" ?
dka: Some people wanted to remove all mentions to CSS media queries. I think it should be emphasized for mobile developers.
adam: What is it that we want to specifically call out about CSS media queries?
dka: I think it is particularly
relevant to mobile developers, because it allows to use
specific device capabilities.
... it's not particularly dynamic capabilities, but still a
good thing to have.
adam: OK. I think the possibilities are pretty limited for me as a developer, but I agree.
dka: francois, do you think you can take an action to craft some text?
<EdC> I suspect that device-width is generally supported in CSS media queries because of other elements such as viewport.
francois: Sure. I think I agree with Adam that it's not that super useful. Some properties are not exactly supported, and the possibilities are not super wow.
jo: I think it's actually not a
best practice.
... If Dan can have the tons of developers he knows that
consider use of CSS media queries as a best practice to explain
how they use it.
... that would be great.
EdC: CSS media queries are only useful in the context of viewports.
dka: ok, why don't you give me an
action to see how people use CSS media queries around
here?
... and an action on Francois to craft some nominal text on CSS
media queries.
adam: I think francois should not
spend time for the time being. Let's fine people who use it in
practice.
... If you can find somebody who has some insight here, then
that would be useful.
dka: I'm happy to take an action.
<scribe> ACTION: dan to find people who use CSS media queries to tell whether it's a BP [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/07-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-994 - Find people who use CSS media queries to tell whether it's a BP [on Daniel Appelquist - due 2009-07-14].
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG
francois: just to note that BPWG's home page actually uses CSS media queries to send different stylesheets depending on the incoming devices.
dka: OK, that's one data point.
adam: I still need to update a few links in the document.
<EdC> Wasn't there a long-standing issue with canvases and svg?
jo: I have some typos for you,
adam. There's also quite a few open actions and issues against
this document.
... We need to resolve them.
adam: Yes. There's also some SVG/canvas issue opened on Jeff.
dka: Is there anything that
prevents us from resolving the issues?
... Let's try to enumerate them.
jo: let me paste the URI to the opened issues and actions.
<jo> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/products/14
ISSUE-262?
<trackbot> ISSUE-262 -- Discuss the option to offer choices of presentation as a best practices for mobile web apps -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/262
dka: Is this something that we can close?
<EdC> Isn't 262 handled somehow in the practice re: classes of devices?
adam: can somebody summarize what it means?
<DKA> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/BestPractices-2.0/ED-mobile-bp2-20090619#d1e1515
dka: the issue is whether the "Offer Users a Choice of Interfaces" is a best practice or not.
adam: the Google's home page does this.
dka: I don't think this is very
controversial, actually.
... I suggest that we resolve it.
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: CLose issue-262 and keep section 3.6.5 in mwabp.
<EdC> +1
+1
<DKA> +1
<adam> +1
<miguel> +1
<SeanP> +1
<DKA> RESOLUTION: CLose issue-262 and keep section 3.6.5 in mwabp.
<yeliz> +1
RESOLUTION: CLose issue-262 and keep section 3.6.5 in mwabp.
close ISSUE-262
<trackbot> ISSUE-262 Discuss the option to offer choices of presentation as a best practices for mobile web apps closed
ISSUE-263?
<trackbot> ISSUE-263 -- How to keep the screen alive (re null gestures) - what to recommend? -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/263
dka: I suggest that we close it. We didn't go anywhere.
adam: I think it would rather be a bad practice to keep the screen alive. I'd rather close this.
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: We close issue-263 and drop the idea of keeping the screen alive as a bp.
<DKA> +1
+1
<adam> +1
<EdC> 0
<miguel> +1
dka: Yes, this would be left to implementations.
RESOLUTION: We close issue-263 and drop the idea of keeping the screen alive as a bp.
close issue-263
<trackbot> ISSUE-263 How to keep the screen alive (re null gestures) - what to recommend? closed
adam: I think this was done when
I rewrote the section on the delivery context.
... So that's complete.
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Close Issue-264 as it has been completed.
<adam> +1
<adam> http://www.w3.org/TR/mwabp/#bp-devcap-scripting (captures aspects of the original concept)
+1
<DKA> +1
RESOLUTION: Close Issue-264 as it has been completed.
<EdC> 0
close ISSUE-264
<trackbot> ISSUE-264 How to rephrase progressive enhancement to make it fit as a BP? closed
<DKA> ISSUE-265?
<trackbot> ISSUE-265 -- Discussion of Jonathan's Submission ref separation of structure presentation and behavior at http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dhpvgnmn_54d7cbhrhn -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/265
adam: I had an action to respond
to this.
... I should just complete my action and respond, I guess.
dka: I think we should close the issue and leave you finish your action.
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: close issue-265 and keep Adam's action open to write up a note to Jonathan why he does not think this makes it as a best practice.
<adam> +1
<DKA> +1
+1
RESOLUTION: close issue-265 and keep Adam's action open to write up a note to Jonathan why he does not think this makes it as a best practice
close issue-265
<trackbot> ISSUE-265 Discussion of Jonathan's Submission ref separation of structure presentation and behavior at http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dhpvgnmn_54d7cbhrhn closed
<DKA> ISSUE-268?
<trackbot> ISSUE-268 -- Test cases to illustrate mobile web application best practices -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/268
<DKA> ACTION-721?
<trackbot> ACTION-721 -- François Daoust to prepare a report's form to fill to test Aaron static/dynamic example -- due 2008-08-14 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/721
francois: I miserably failed to complete my action here
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: We abandon action-721 and issue-268 for this version of the Mobile Web Application Best Practices and defer it to v2.
francois: I suggest we drop it. It was supposed to be the start of a complete testing framework.
adam: It would not be trivial to do it.
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: We abandon action-721 and issue-268 for this version of the Mobile Web Application Best Practices.
<EdC> +1
+1
<DKA> +1
<adam> +1 (I wish we had more bench-marking / testing but it would be a very big task).
RESOLUTION: We abandon action-721 and issue-268 for this version of the Mobile Web Application Best Practices.
close ACTION-721
<trackbot> ACTION-721 Prepare a report's form to fill to test Aaron static/dynamic example closed
close ISSUE-268
<trackbot> ISSUE-268 Test cases to illustrate mobile web application best practices closed
<DKA> ISSUE-279?
<trackbot> ISSUE-279 -- 4.3.3 Provide Disclosures that are Timely and Accessible -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/279
dka: [mumbling about mobileAppOK]
adam: I think this is done.
<DKA> ACTION-861?
<trackbot> ACTION-861 -- Bryan Sullivan to propose text ref ISSUE-279 -- due 2008-10-15 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/861
dka: is the action completed?
adam: yes, I think Bryan did that.
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: The text has moved on since the points in ISSUE-279 were made so we will close ISSUE-279 and ACTION-861.
<EdC> So these are no longer relevant...
<DKA> +1
<EdC> +1
+1
RESOLUTION: The text has moved on since the points in ISSUE-279 were made so we will close ISSUE-279 and ACTION-861.
close ISSUE-279
<trackbot> ISSUE-279 4.3.3 Provide Disclosures that are Timely and Accessible closed
close ACTION-861
<trackbot> ACTION-861 Propose text ref ISSUE-279 closed
<DKA> ISSUE-280?
<trackbot> ISSUE-280 -- 3.3 User awareness and control -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/280
adam: same here, it predates the discussion we had during last F2F. I think it can be safely closed.
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: The text has moved on since the points made in ISSUE-280 so we will close ISSUE-280.
<DKA> +1
<adam> +1
<EdC> 0
RESOLUTION: The text has moved on since the points made in ISSUE-280 so we will close ISSUE-280.
<DKA> ISSUE-281?
<trackbot> ISSUE-281 -- MWA should disclose their capabilities in HTTP requests, to allow service adaptation -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/281
close ISSUE-280
<trackbot> ISSUE-280 3.3 User awareness and control closed
adam: It's been dormant for some
time now.
... It's out of scope.
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: WRT ISSUE-281, this is out of scope for MWABP so we will close ISSUE-281 and take no action.
<adam> +1
adam: I'm for closing it
<DKA> +1
<EdC> +1
RESOLUTION: WRT ISSUE-281, this is out of scope for MWABP so we will close ISSUE-281 and take no action.
close ISSUE-281
<trackbot> ISSUE-281 MWA should disclose their capabilities in HTTP requests, to allow service adaptation closed
<DKA> ISSUE-287?
<trackbot> ISSUE-287 -- Propose merging 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 in MWABP -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/287
dka: does this still make sense?
<EdC> no longer relevant => close it.
adam: instead of merging, we replaced them with application data. So the topic's moot.
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Issue-287 is moot so we will close issue-287.
<EdC> +1
<DKA> +1
<adam> +1
+1
RESOLUTION: Issue-287 is moot so we will close issue-287.
close ISSUE-287
<trackbot> ISSUE-287 Propose merging 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 in MWABP closed
<DKA> ISSUE-290?
<trackbot> ISSUE-290 -- Desirable Goal of MWABP statements -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/290
adam: Jonathan raised this during
last F2F. We had no further discussion on this.
... I don't think desirable goals would add much value, they
would just add text.
dka: considering Johnathan is not here, should we give him some kind of deadline to come up with some text?
adam: He did propose some document.
<DKA> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Mar/0132.html
dka: I'm not so happy about so
quickly abandoning this idea.
... What do you think, francois?
francois: it's related to the icons we want to have, but don't really have for the time being, right?
adam: It's close but not exactly the same. We should still keep the icons.
dka: the desirable goals are more
text we may want to add to each statement.
... It just seems like a bit of work.
... Within 3.4 for instance, we could include a bit more text
about performance
... Why don't we leave it open and somebody send a message to
Jonathan about ISSUE-290?
francois: I'm unclear about the added value compared to the existing structure of the document. Consider the section on User-Experience, it's pretty clear the BPs are about improving the user experience.
dka: It may be a way to flag a BP
that sits in a section and that also has an impact on some
other section.
... That would be kind of a low impact way to do what Jonathan
is suggesting.
adam: As a principal, I don't
have any objection against this.
... Sections preambles already try to mention that. For
instance the Conservative User of Resources and the section on
User Experience
<DKA> Adam should look through J.J.'s email and apply additional text as necessary to reflect the additional desireable goals as a note after each individual BP.
<DKA> ACTION: Adam to look through J.J.'s email and apply additional text as necessary to reflect the additional desireable goals as a note after each individual BP. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/07-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-995 - Look through J.J.'s email and apply additional text as necessary to reflect the additional desireable goals as a note after each individual BP. [on Adam Connors - due 2009-07-14].
dka: so we'll leave ISSUE-290
opened for the time being.
... with an attached action
<DKA> ISSUE-291?
<trackbot> ISSUE-291 -- widget best practices -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/291
dka: my view is that we should
not do this.
... and that we should close the issue.
... Not because it's not important.
<EdC> At least an explicit statement in the document about the non-inclusion of widgets?
dka: But because there is not
enough implementation experience in the wild to say things
about that at this time.
... I talked with Art Barstow, chair of the Webapps WG about a
Widget Best Practices document.
... We agreed that if it were to be done, the Web apps WG would
be the correct place to do it.
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: The group will not add widget BPs to MWABP and will not work on a special widget BP doc at this time; close ISSUE-291.
<adam> +1
EdC: will you put a note that we exclude widgets from the document?
<adam> http://www.w3.org/TR/mwabp/#webapp-defined
adam: There's already some text in 1.3.2. I think it's fine as it stands.
dka: I think we need to modify
that text. Remove the words "being considered"
... Two different things. In one sense, the BPs are applicable
to widgets, because it's just a package for a web app.
... But there's some specific stuff in widgets, such as
localization.
<DKA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: The group will not add widget BPs to MWABP and will not work on a special widget BP doc at this time; close ISSUE-291. We will put an explicit statement in the doc stating that widgets-specifc BPs are out in scope because not enough implementation experience exists at time of writing.
+1
<EdC> +1
<adam> +1
<miguel> +1
RESOLUTION: The group will not add widget BPs to MWABP and will not work on a special widget BP doc at this time; close ISSUE-291. We will put an explicit statement in the doc stating that widgets-specifc BPs are out in scope because not enough implementation experience exists at time of writing.
<DKA> Also think you should change the reference to: http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/
close ISSUE-291
<trackbot> ISSUE-291 widget best practices closed
dka: one open issue remaining on MWABP, that's good!
dka: Eduardo, you wanted to talk about that.
<EdC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0101.html
EdC: this is Francois' response to my comment that explains why the note is correct, but is terse. The meaning is likely to be lost by readers.
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0108.html Eduardo's proposed clarification
<EdC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0108.html
EdC: The sentence in the guidelines has all the semantics required, but is a bit unclear. So I suggest to add a clarifying sentence.
dka: can we turn that into a proposed resolution?
<jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: The URI of the request plays no part in determining wehter request header values are modified and in particular,whether or not a urI PATTERN IS MENTIONED IN 4.2.9 IS NOT MATERIAL TO THIS JUDGEMNT
<EdC> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: add the following sentence to the 2nd note of 4.1.5: "For the sake of clarity: a URI not matching those specified in 4.2.9 does not
<EdC> imply that the corresponding site delivers content unsuitable for mobile devices."
jo: I just wanted to avoid the
double negative.
... I think it is better to say that the URI of the request
plays no part here, that is basically what we're trying to
say
francois: agree with Jo. Double negative is usually unclear.
<EdC> "The purpose of the note was to emphasize the opposite: the absence of a
<EdC> mobile indication in a URI pattern does not mean that HTTP header field
<EdC> values should be transformed."
<DKA> +1 to Jo's resolution and giving the editor some leeway.
jo: can you leave it to the editor to come up with some text on the basis that it will be easier to understand?
<jo> ACTION: Jo to add agreed text to 4.1.5 trying to avoid inserting too many negatives, not, not [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/07-bpwg-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-996 - Add agreed text to 4.1.5 trying to avoid inserting too many negatives, not, not [on Jo Rabin - due 2009-07-14].
<DKA> -1 to tea.
jo: Eduardo, do you agree?
<jo> +1 to tea party
EdC: shouldn't it rather be "and whether or not the URI pattern matches one of those defined in 4.2.9"?
<jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: The URI referred to inthe request plays no part in determining whether request header values are modified and in particular,whether or not a a URI ,matches the PATTERNs MENTIONED IN 4.2.9 IS NOT MATERIAL TO THIS JUDGEMNT
<EdC> +1
<DKA> +1
RESOLUTION: The URI referred to in the request plays no part in determining whether request header values are modified and in particular,whether or not a a URI, matches the patterns mentioned in 4.2.9 IS NOT MATERIAL TO THIS JUDGEMNT
dka: That sounds like a lovely
coda to our great call, today!
... Thanks everyone!
<miguel> bye
<yeliz> bye
[Call adjourned]