See also: IRC log
MobileOK scheme: formal correction to media type in the document necessary.
The correction could be published in a list of errata but would best not be hidden. Suggestion: re-publish the note with the correction.
<francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: re-publish the mobileOK Scheme Note with the correct "application/powder+xml" media type for POWDER.
Deemed important because of impact on the validator.
+1
<francois> +1
RESOLUTION: re-publish the mobileOK Scheme Note with the correct "application/powder+xml" media type for POWDER.
<francois> ACTION-928?
<trackbot> ACTION-928 -- Francois Daoust to progress registration of the X- headers irrespective his personal distate for the subject -- due 2009-04-02 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/928
Registration of X-Device-* header fields: a few replied in the IETF mailing list. Suggestion: register the header fields without X- prefix.
Francois lets one more week pass on the IETF mailing list before registration takes place.
<francois> latest discussion on the IETF mailing-list
<francois> ACTION-969?
<trackbot> ACTION-969 -- Charles McCathieNevile to forward tests for Xss and cookie handling to group -- due 2009-06-23 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/969
Tests have not been reviewed so far. Somebody should be given a task to do this.
Is the question whether the tests cover what we want to check ?
Main problem (Francois, Eduardo): seem ok, but do they cover the issues of same-origin policy? Security specialists think this is not so simple an aspect to test at run-time.
Suggestion: deeper review of the test suite.
<francois> ACTION: daoust to review tests provided by Charles on same origin policy [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/11-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1001 - Review tests provided by Charles on same origin policy [on François Daoust - due 2009-08-18].
<francois> ACTION-991?
<trackbot> ACTION-991 -- François Daoust to check legality of mailing list name and maek the new list -- due 2009-07-07 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/991
<francois> mailing-list announcement
<francois> public-content-transformation-conformance@w3.org
Mailing list to publish and comment on ICS for transformation proxies.
<francois> close ACTION-991
<trackbot> ACTION-991 Check legality of mailing list name and maek the new list closed
<francois> updated ICS announcement
ICS have not been formally reviewed yet. An update has been prepared by Francois.
Two variants: one version with all statements, and one excluding the MUST/MUST NOT statements. First impressions are that the former version is preferable. Suggestion: decide to use the complete ICS variant.
<francois> complete version
<francois> should-only version
EdC: I am in favour of the complete version.
<francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Use a complete ICS that contains both MUST/MUST NOT and SHOULD/SHOULD NOT statements
And I favour keeping it as a separate document from the CTG itself !
<SeanP> I like the full version.
<tomhume> +1
<SeanP> Agree that it should be a separate document.
<francois> +1
Initial idea of excluding MUST was that they have to be respected anyway (so are somewhat redundant when assessing the conformance of an implementation).
+1
<SeanP> +1
<francois> EdC: keep that as a separate document or integrate it with main document?
<francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Use a separate ICS document that contains all MUST-level and SHOULD-level statements
<francois> +1
+1
<SeanP> +1
RESOLUTION: Use a separate ICS document that contains all MUST-level and SHOULD-level statements
Regarding content: satisfactory so far. No further formatting needed.
<SeanP> Looks good to me.
<francois> close ACTION-892
<trackbot> ACTION-892 Prepare an ICS with MUST/MUST NOT (to view if that's a good idea), try to add a "depends on" column, explain "Not applicable" or remove it. closed
<francois> jo's email
<francois> latest CT draft
<francois> ACTION-971?
<trackbot> ACTION-971 -- Jo Rabin to adopt text proposed by EdC and Amended by Jo for the Abstract -- due 2009-06-22 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/971
Many actions pending review.
<francois> close ACTION-971
<trackbot> ACTION-971 Adopt text proposed by EdC and Amended by Jo for the Abstract closed
<francois> ACTION-972?
<trackbot> ACTION-972 -- Jo Rabin to add NOT RECOMMENDED to the rfc2119 section of the document -- due 2009-06-22 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/972
<francois> close ACTION-972
<trackbot> ACTION-972 add NOT RECOMMENDED to the rfc2119 section of the document closed
<francois> ACTION-973?
<trackbot> ACTION-973 -- Jo Rabin to add Accept-Language ot the other than list in 4.1.5 -- due 2009-06-23 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/973
<francois> close ACTION-973
<trackbot> ACTION-973 Add Accept-Language ot the other than list in 4.1.5 closed
<francois> ACTION-974?
<trackbot> ACTION-974 -- Jo Rabin to enact the resolution of 28th April ref x-device cf http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0044.html -- due 2009-06-23 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/974
<francois> close ACTION-974
<trackbot> ACTION-974 Enact the resolution of 28th April ref x-device cf http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0044.html closed
<francois> ACTION-975?
<trackbot> ACTION-975 -- Jo Rabin to correct SeanP's point 2 -- due 2009-06-23 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/975
I believe it was just to refer to RFC, and avoid inserting production rules for the X-Device-fields.
<francois> Sean's comments on previous email
Sean to review Action 975.
<francois> ACTION: sean to review Jo's updates in draft 1s based on his feedback. When done, actions 975, 976, 977, 978, 979 can be closed [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/11-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1002 - Review Jo's updates in draft 1s based on his feedback. When done, actions 975, 976, 977, 978, 979 can be closed [on Sean Patterson - due 2009-08-18].
<francois> ACTION-980?
<trackbot> ACTION-980 -- Jo Rabin to remove editorial note at 4.2.9 ref mobileOK and add a reference to mobileOK scheme to show how it is done -- due 2009-06-23 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/980
<francois> close ACTION-980
<trackbot> ACTION-980 Remove editorial note at 4.2.9 ref mobileOK and add a reference to mobileOK scheme to show how it is done closed
<francois> ACTION-985?
<trackbot> ACTION-985 -- Eduardo Casais to assess whether there is any relevant terminology we can quote in respect of last para of Section 5 - cf ACTION-933 -- due 2009-06-23 -- CLOSED
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/985
Any news from Kai on BP: none. Work still outstanding. Kai was absent (vacations) and must catch up with the status of the edition of the document.
<francois> Old actions
<francois> ACTION-797?
<trackbot> ACTION-797 -- Jeffrey Sonstein to check on availability of data about the number of acceptable links in a focus-based browser -- due 2008-09-25 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/797
Action 797 still open, old action. Discussion has been interrupted for a long time.
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 797
<francois> close ACTION-797
<trackbot> ACTION-797 Check on availability of data about the number of acceptable links in a focus-based browser closed
<francois> ACTION-837?
<trackbot> ACTION-837 -- Kai Scheppe 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. -- due 2008-09-11 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/837
<francois> close ACTION-837
<trackbot> 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. closed
The pending actions can be closed, they have been taken care of and integrated in the document.
<francois> ACTION-847?
<trackbot> ACTION-847 -- Kai Scheppe to change the Addendum according to the resolution about toning down the test character of the document -- due 2008-09-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/847
<francois> close ACTION-847
<trackbot> ACTION-847 Change the Addendum according to the resolution about toning down the test character of the document closed
<francois> ACTION-848?
<trackbot> ACTION-848 -- Kai Scheppe to sprinkle in delivery context information (DDC and others) where appropriate -- due 2008-09-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/848
<francois> close ACTION-848
<trackbot> ACTION-848 Sprinkle in delivery context information (DDC and others) where appropriate closed
Adam has posted a couple of messages on the mailing list regarding MWABP.
I.e. new text for handling recognition of device capabilities. Important change to be reviewed.
Apart from other less major revisions, the pending point is a discussion on Canvas/SVG.
<brucel> is there a direct link to the CSSMQ and Canvas/ SVG changes?
A detailed answer to Jonathan's suggestion has been made. J's proposals have been included in some form or another in the document, so no further work should be needed there.
Afterwards, the document could be published.
CSS-MQ and Canvas/SVG are two separate issues.
Adam thinks it is not necessary to expand the text much. Some more context about CSS-MQ should be provided, but the technology is fairly clear.
<francois> latest text for handling variations and CSS MQ
EdC: hadn't we in a previous meeting decided that they should be some kind of warnings on CSS media types?
adam: there's a sentence that they should not be fully relied upon.
EdC: that's two different things. There's media queries and media types, and media types are sometimes suprisingly handled by mobile devices
<brucel> media types as in "handheld"?
adam: ok, understood.
People should review the proposed text and make comments on the mailing list.
<francois> ACTION-997?
<trackbot> ACTION-997 -- Adam Connors to write first text based on the listserve discussion of Media Queries -- due 2009-07-21 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/997
An issue becoming more acute in the mobile environment: pixel density.
<francois> EdC's email on pixel density
<francois> EdC: I would have difficulty to propose any kind of BP. It's becoming more and more acute. It's something to keep an eye.
Existing BP are weak on this topic. BP 1 deals with absolute measures vs. relative, font dimensions, not really informational content.
The topic is becoming important, but there are no best practices we can identify at this stage. The group stands by its previous resolution.
<francois> ACTION-845?
<trackbot> ACTION-845 -- Kai Scheppe to finalize information on caching concept, now live, and contribute it to the list. -- due 2008-09-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/845
The question is: has the information in the BP related to caching been completed? The text contains now recommendations about caching; are they enough?
<francois> Kai's email on caching
<francois> close ACTION-845
<trackbot> ACTION-845 Finalize information on caching concept, now live, and contribute it to the list. closed
According to Kai: this was supposed to be reviewed by a colleague of Dan (but wasn't done). Some fairly detailed caching behaviour has been discussed.
<francois> ACTION-995?
<trackbot> ACTION-995 -- Adam Connors 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. -- due 2009-07-14 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/995
We give some more time to Jonathan so that he can consider the detailed response of Adam to his proposals.
<francois> ACTION-999?
<trackbot> ACTION-999 -- Daniel Appelquist to feedback on action-845 -- due 2009-07-21 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/999
<francois> close ACTION-999
<trackbot> ACTION-999 Feedback on action-845 closed
MWABP: almost there: CSS-MQ to be reviewed. Main issue: Canvas/SVG (a proposal is to be sent by Jeff). Afterwards, the document is ready to be published.
<francois> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/products
<francois> ACTION-970?
<trackbot> ACTION-970 -- Phil Archer to ask Rigo to consider Jo's comments and revise mobileOK license accordingly -- due 2009-06-09 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/970
<francois> close ACTION-970
<trackbot> ACTION-970 ask Rigo to consider Jo's comments and revise mobileOK license accordingly closed
<francois> ACTION-838?
<trackbot> ACTION-838 -- Bryan Sullivan to summarise points to take back to the WebApps group -- due 2008-09-10 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/838
Old action still open.
<francois> close ACTION-838
<trackbot> ACTION-838 Summarise points to take back to the WebApps group closed
<francois> ACTION-875?
<trackbot> ACTION-875 -- Jeffrey Sonstein to scope current draft and see what aspects may be of interest to us. -- due 2008-10-27 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/875
<francois> close ACTION-875
<trackbot> ACTION-875 Scope current draft and see what aspects may be of interest to us. closed
Reply to be sent, but missed the deadline.
<francois> actions pending review
<francois> ACTION-903?
<trackbot> ACTION-903 -- François Daoust to setup a registration poll for next F2F in London -- due 2009-02-03 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/903
<francois> close ACTION-903
<trackbot> ACTION-903 Setup a registration poll for next F2F in London closed
<francois> ACTION-917?
<trackbot> ACTION-917 -- François 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 -- due 2009-03-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/917
<francois> close ACTION-917
<trackbot> 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 closed
TPAC = Technical Plenary Advisory Committee (November in California). Decision pending: whether the group attends or not.
<francois> ACTION-968?
<trackbot> ACTION-968 -- Jo Rabin to add NOT RECOMMENDED to the rfc2119 section of the document -- due 2009-06-16 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/968
<francois> close ACTION-968
<trackbot> ACTION-968 Add NOT RECOMMENDED to the rfc2119 section of the document closed
Any other business?
bye
<brucel> bye all