Edit comment LC-1857 for Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group

Quick access to LC-1854 LC-1855 LC-1856 LC-1857 LC-1858 LC-1859 LC-1896 LC-1897 LC-1898 LC-1899 LC-1900 LC-1901 LC-1902 LC-1903 LC-1904 LC-1905 LC-1906 LC-1907 LC-1908 LC-1909

Comment LC-1857

Comment Shortname:

Commenter: Bryan Sullivan <BS3131@att.com>

Message-id:

Section of the document concerned:

[Free text description]Document as a wholeW3C mobileOK Basic Tests 1.0 /**/ code { font-... W3C mobileOK Basic Tests 1.0 W3C Working Draft 28 September 2007 Abstract Status of this Document Table of Contents Appendices 1 Introduction 1.1 Levels of mobileOK 1.1.1 mobileOK Basic 1.1.2 mobileOK Pro 1.1.3 Out of Scope 1.1.4 Beyond mobileOK 1.2 Applicability 1.3 Claiming mobileOK conformance 2 Conformance 2.1 Use of Terms must, should etc. 2.2 Validity of the Tests 2.3 Testing Outcomes 2.4 Conduct of Tests 2.4.1 Order of Tests 2.4.2 HTTP Request 2.4.3 HTTP Response 2.4.4 Meta http-equiv Elements 2.4.5 CSS Style 2.4.6 Included Resources 2.4.7 Linked Resources 2.4.8 Validity 2.4.9 White Space 3 mobileOK Basic Tests 3.1 AUTO_REFRESH and REDIRECTION 3.2 CACHING 3.3 CHARACTER_ENCODING_SUPPORT and CHARACTER_ENCODING_USE 3.4 CONTENT_FORMAT_SUPPORT and VALID_MARKUP 3.5 DEFAULT_INPUT_MODE 3.6 EXTERNAL_RESOURCES 3.7 GRAPHICS_FOR_SPACING 3.8 IMAGE_MAPS 3.9 IMAGES_RESIZING and IMAGES_SPECIFY_SIZE 3.10 LINK_TARGET_FORMAT 3.11 MEASURES 3.12 MINIMIZE 3.13 NO_FRAMES 3.14 NON-TEXT_ALTERNATIVES 3.15 OBJECTS_OR_SCRIPT 3.16 PAGE_SIZE_LIMIT 3.17 PAGE_TITLE 3.18 POP_UPS 3.19 PROVIDE_DEFAULTS 3.20 STYLE_SHEETS_SUPPORT 3.21 STYLE_SHEETS_USE 3.22 TABLES_ALTERNATIVES 3.23 TABLES_LAYOUT 3.24 TABLES_NESTED A Acknowledgments (Non-Normative) B References (Non-Normative) BestPractices CSS GIF JPEG POWDER RFC2119 RFC2617 Techniques UTF-8 WCAG XHTMLBasic11 XHTMLModularization XML10 XML11 C Relationship between Best Practices and mobileOK Tests (Non-Normative)
or

Refinement of the section concerned:

Status:

open proposal pending resolved_yes resolved_no resolved_partial other assigned to Nobody

Type: substantive editorial typo question general comment undefined

Resolution status:

Response drafted Resolution implemented Reply sent to commenter

Response status:

No response from Commenter yet Commenter approved disposition Commenter objected to disposition
Commenter's response (URI):

Comment:

"If the HTTP status indicates redirection... If the response relates to a request for the resource under test... Include the size of the response in the total described under 3.16 PAGE_SIZE_LIMIT":
[bryan] The size of response headers and content in 3xx responses should not count toward the page size total. Page size limitations in the DDC should relate to only the ultimate page returned in response to the original request (e.g. 2xx response page) and all its embedded or referenced objects that have to be retrieved (e.g. style sheets). The size of content or headers in 3xx responses is irrelevant, unless there is some transient response handling limitation (these are most commonly related to the size of the Location header URI, or excessive cookies set in the 3xx response). This comment also applies to the section for status code 401 ("Include the size of the response in the total...") and ("Include this response under the count...).

Related issues: (space separated ids)

WG Notes: Proposed to resolve 'no': We'd like to count redirects "against" the resource. Redirects are going to slow things down and if one has to go through one to get to the real resource, that should be accounted for. A 302 ought not have a body anyway; seems like wasteful overhead. RESOLUTION: LC-1857 No We are keen to minimise rounds trips and reduce the overall data transfer burden which is why it is like it is

Resolution: We are keen to minimize rounds trips and reduce the overall data transfer burden which is why it is like it is.

(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)