IRC log of bpwg on 2009-08-18

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:18:33 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #bpwg
13:18:33 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:18:35 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
13:18:35 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #bpwg
13:18:37 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be BPWG
13:18:37 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see MWI_BPWG()9:30AM scheduled to start in 12 minutes
13:18:38 [trackbot]
Meeting: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference
13:18:38 [trackbot]
Date: 18 August 2009
13:18:46 [francois]
13:18:49 [francois]
Chair: DKA
13:19:09 [francois]
Regrets: jo, kai, brucel, tomhume
13:23:00 [yeliz]
yeliz has joined #bpwg
13:23:51 [francois]
Regrets+ abel, nacho
13:28:29 [cgi-irc]
cgi-irc has joined #bpwg
13:28:37 [cgi-irc]
13:28:37 [Zakim]
the conference code is 2794 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.117.370.6152), cgi-irc
13:29:22 [Zakim]
MWI_BPWG()9:30AM has now started
13:29:29 [Zakim]
13:29:32 [Zakim]
+ +1.774.811.aaaa
13:29:35 [Zakim]
13:29:37 [Zakim]
13:31:35 [EdC]
EdC has joined #bpwg
13:31:59 [adam]
zakim, aaaa is me
13:31:59 [Zakim]
+adam; got it
13:32:21 [Zakim]
13:32:23 [DKA1]
DKA1 has joined #bpwg
13:32:26 [yeliz]
zakim, ??P16 is yeliz
13:32:26 [Zakim]
+yeliz; got it
13:32:36 [Zakim]
13:32:42 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
13:32:42 [Zakim]
yeliz should now be muted
13:33:21 [Zakim]
+ +41.31.972.aabb
13:33:33 [francois]
zakim, aabb is EfC
13:33:33 [Zakim]
+EfC; got it
13:33:42 [francois]
zakim, EfC is really EdC
13:33:42 [Zakim]
+EdC; got it
13:33:43 [DKA1]
zakim, who is here?
13:33:44 [Zakim]
On the phone I see adam, adam.a, yeliz (muted), francois, EdC
13:33:45 [Zakim]
On IRC I see DKA1, EdC, adam, yeliz, Zakim, RRSAgent, francois, trackbot
13:36:25 [yeliz]
zakim, unmute yeliz
13:36:25 [Zakim]
yeliz should no longer be muted
13:36:29 [EdC]
13:36:35 [francois]
Scribe: EdC
13:36:44 [miguel]
miguel has joined #bpwg
13:36:47 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
13:36:47 [Zakim]
yeliz should now be muted
13:37:03 [francois]
Topic: CT Guidelines - ACTION-928 - X- headers
13:37:12 [francois]
-> fd's email
13:37:36 [Zakim]
13:38:01 [SeanP]
SeanP has joined #bpwg
13:38:10 [EdC]
François summarizes the discussion that went on the IETF mailing list. We proceed with the registration in the provisional registry.
13:39:00 [EdC]
The issue is the name: X-Device prefixed fields will probably be hard to get accepted in the permanent registry. However, it seems that a W3C recommendation may require a permanent registration.
13:39:24 [EdC]
The net effect: while it is possible to make a provisional registration, a permanent registration will require extensive discussions with IETF.
13:39:28 [Zakim]
13:41:14 [EdC]
Question from DKA about the transitional period if a new field is introduced: there is no way to limit the transition period, both deprecated and new fields would have to be supported. Suggestion from IETF: register X-Device as deprecated, temporary and a new, non X-prefixed set fields as permanent.
13:41:38 [EdC]
However, while this is "clean" regarding naming, it does not really solve the transition mess.
13:42:39 [EdC]
Summa summarum: X-Device fields will be temporary registered. Depending on the feedback on "last call" on the recommendation, the final discussion about the header field will be undertaken.
13:43:27 [EdC]
Any introduction of a new field is formally tiny, but has large implications and we would need a new "last call" to introduce such a modification.
13:44:25 [EdC]
Feedback from IETF about X-prefixed fields is a bit wary. In practice, several X-fields are used in production deployment in the Internet.
13:45:28 [EdC]
So, there is still a chance to get X-Device fields permanently registered IF a) the usage is clearly explained b) the reason is substantiated and clearly motivated. Then the IETF might accept a permanent registration of X-Device fields.
13:45:41 [EdC]
For now: let us register the said fields temporarily.
13:46:05 [francois]
Topic: CT Guidelines - remaining actions
13:46:14 [EdC]
From DKA: what other main issues are standing before the "last call"?
13:47:04 [francois]
13:47:04 [trackbot]
ACTION-1001 -- François Daoust to review tests provided by Charles on same origin policy -- due 2009-08-18 -- OPEN
13:47:04 [trackbot]
13:47:15 [EdC]
Answers François: a) editorial changes (many assigned to Jo Rabin) b) review of tests to check issues on "same URI origin" (on François).
13:48:00 [EdC]
c) Sean has actions to review pending changes.
13:48:41 [EdC]
2. Addendum to BP (BP1.5) - Status update
13:48:41 [francois]
Topic: Addendum to BP (BP1.5) - Status update
13:49:05 [EdC]
One remaining action on Phil (who is not present to report on it).
13:49:16 [EdC]
3. MWABP - Status update
13:49:21 [francois]
Topic: MWABP - status update
13:49:35 [EdC]
Lots of progress done on this document. What are the main remaining points?
13:50:13 [EdC]
Answers Adam: a) editorial changes from Edc b) content missing regarding canvas/SVG (from Jeff) c) minor editorial alterations (Adam).
13:51:04 [EdC]
a) concerning mainly the last proposal of Adam re: capability detection. c) includes feedback awaited from Jonathan.
13:51:18 [francois]
-> EdC editorial comments on media queries
13:52:18 [francois]
13:52:18 [trackbot]
ACTION-990 -- Jo Rabin to reference the conformance mailing list in the ct doc -- due 2009-07-07 -- OPEN
13:52:18 [trackbot]
13:52:23 [francois]
13:52:23 [trackbot]
ACTION-998 -- Adam Connors to extract some useful info from the discussion around ACTION-790 and add it to the doc -- due 2009-07-21 -- OPEN
13:52:23 [trackbot]
13:52:44 [francois]
13:52:44 [trackbot]
ACTION-994 -- Daniel Appelquist to find people who use CSS media queries to tell whether it's a BP -- due 2009-07-14 -- CLOSED
13:52:44 [trackbot]
13:53:52 [EdC]
The idea with 998 / 790 is to insert some warnings regarding the possible effect of using Javascript on accessibility (may prevent it or make difficult alternative representation).
13:53:53 [yeliz]
Adam, related to ARIA on mobile, there was a discussion about it on the WAI-IG:
13:54:11 [EdC]
Topic 4. Actions and Issues
13:55:05 [EdC]
François mentions that we will have to tackle the issue regarding of the TPAC. Should we attend or not?
13:55:50 [EdC]
What would be the reason to hold a meeting in the TPAC if our work (CTG, MWABP, etc) is mostly concluded and published?
13:57:16 [EdC]
From DKA: he will be co-chairing a Web-incubator event, and dealing with device API, widget sessions. If the BPWG meets, it would be important that the agenda do not conflict (DKA is already very booked at the TPAC).
13:58:20 [EdC]
The issue floats in the air and will be taken back later
13:58:48 [EdC]
There is currently no issue about this specific topic. Why no create one, at least to remind us about it?
13:58:51 [francois]
ISSUE: To go or not to go to TPAC 2009?
13:58:51 [trackbot]
Created ISSUE-299 - To go or not to go to TPAC 2009? ; please complete additional details at .
13:59:43 [EdC]
Status for next week: there is a call agreed. Will Jo Rabin be back? In principle yes.
14:00:04 [Zakim]
14:00:04 [Zakim]
14:00:05 [yeliz]
yeliz has left #bpwg
14:00:05 [Zakim]
14:00:07 [Zakim]
14:00:09 [Zakim]
14:00:13 [francois]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:00:13 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate francois
14:00:19 [Zakim]
14:00:50 [Zakim]
14:00:52 [Zakim]
MWI_BPWG()9:30AM has ended
14:00:53 [Zakim]
Attendees were adam, +1.774.811.aaaa, yeliz, francois, +41.31.972.aabb, EdC, miguel, SeanP
14:00:58 [francois]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:00:58 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate francois
14:31:53 [francois]
RRSAgent, bye
14:31:53 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items