W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg-ct@w3.org > July 2007

Problem statement notes from F2F session

From: Rhys Lewis <rhys@volantis.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:44:04 -0700 (PDT)
To: <public-bpwg-ct@w3.org>
Cc: "'BPWG'" <member-bpwg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <004b01c7caed$7b3bb940$0301a8c0@volantisuk>
Hello everyone, 
 
I transcribed the flip charts that we created during yesterdays Content
Transformation task force session at the BP F2F. Here are the notes I
created:
 
I also alluded to a couple of DIWG documents that say things related to
the delivery channel and the way that the delivery context might be used
in such chains.
 
The documents are the Device Independence Principles [1] and the Delivery
Context Overview [2]. These documents were originally created early in the
life of DIWG but were subsequently updated.
 
Best wishes
Rhys
 
P.S Note that the public mailing list for the task force is up and running
- Thanks to Mike.
 
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/di-princ/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/di-dco/
 
Actors
------
UA/Device
Intermediaries such as Gateway, Transformer, Proxy, Origin Server
 
Problem Statements
------------------
 
Identifying mobile content
 
Identifying user agents to proxies, other intermediaries, origin server...
 
Requesting that UA or transformer or other intermediary leave the material
alons
 
Identification of actors in the delivery context so that they can find out
about each other
 
'Transparency' to content developers - ensuring that they can find out
what 
transformations might occur and what effect that might have on their
content
 
Identifying UA/Device characteristics - c.f. DDWG
 
User control of the experience - e.g. deciding whether they want the
desktop
or mobile experience when there is a choice.
 
Avoiding making assumptions about what the user wants
 
'Cache control no transform' not honured currently
 
Implications of transformation on security
 
Implications of 'man in the middle' security attacks
 
Wishing to send a correct UA header to the origin server and not get a 406
error or a 200 and a page saying there is an error.
406 means that content negotiation failed, and that there was not a
version of
the representation that matched the content types listed in the request.
 
How can transformers advertise their capabilities to origin servers, user
agents
and other intermediaries
 
Consistent definitions of transformer capabilities - ontology?
 
Must operate within existing technology
 
Implications of intermediaries on content labelling
 
How do you identify the 'most important' parts of the page
 
Implications of operations such as advert insertion and similar changes to

original content
 
 
Received on Friday, 20 July 2007 16:44:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:10:36 GMT