W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg-comments@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: Comments on W3C mobileOK Basic Tests 1.0 January 2007

From: Christophe Strobbe <christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 19:26:39 +0200
Message-Id: <>
To: mike@w3.org
Cc: public-bpwg-comments@w3.org

Dear Michael Smith,

At 16:14 4/06/2007, mike@w3.org wrote:
>  Dear Christophe Strobbe ,
>The Mobile Web Best Practice Working Group has reviewed the comments you
>sent [1] on the Last Call Working Draft [2] of the W3C mobileOK Basic
>Tests 1.0 published on 30 Jan 2007. Thank you for having taken the time to
>review the document and to send us comments!
>The Working Group's response to your comment is included below, and has
>been implemented in the new version of the document available at:
>Please review it carefully and let us know if you agree with it or not
>before 22 June 2007. In case of disagreement, you are requested to provide
>a specific solution for or a path to a consensus with the Working Group. If
>such a consensus cannot be achieved, you will be given the opportunity to
>raise a formal objection which will then be reviewed by the Director
>during the transition of this document to the next stage in the W3C
>Recommendation Track.
>For the Mobile Web Best Practice Working Group,
>Michael(tm) Smith
>W3C Staff Contact
>  1.
>  2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-mobileOK-basic10-tests-20070130/
>Your comment on 3.1 AUTO_REFRESH (partial) and REDIRECTION:
> > Note that the if statements for the meta element and the HTTP refresh
> > header are different: one refers to "the current resources's URI",
> > while the second refers to "the current page". Shouldn't the same
> > wording be used in both cases?
>Working Group Resolution:
>Yes, thanks we will use the term URI.

I agree with the resolution.

>Your comment on 3.4 CONTENT_FORMAT_SUPPORT:
> > People are aware of validators for HTML, XHTML and CSS, but how do
> > you check if an image is valid according to GIF89A or JPEG? Do image
> > editors check this or do they just check whether the images are "good
> > enough" for the editor? Could you provide pointers to tools that are
> > reliable "validators" for GIF89A and JPEG?
>Working Group Resolution:
>Suggested resolution is to provide a pointer to the normative references
>for JPEG and GIF89A:
>We will not recommend a specific validator or implementation of these
>specs in mobileOK Basic, but, many such implementations do exist.

I agree with the resolution.

Best regards,


Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD
Research Group on Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442
B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee
tel: +32 16 32 85 51

Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2007 17:40:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:01:50 UTC