W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg-ct@w3.org > January 2008

[minutes] Tuesday 22 January Teleconf

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:49:30 +0100
To: public-bpwg-ct@w3.org
Message-Id: <1201020570.14224.47.camel@DOUST-W3CLAPTOP>

Hi,

The minutes of our Teleconf' are available at:
http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html

... and copied as text below.

Fran├žois.


22 Jan 2008

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Jan/0013.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Bryan_Sullivan, Magnus, francois, jo, kemp, hgerlach, SeanP

   Regrets
          Andrew

   Chair
          francois

   Scribe
          bryan

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Greetings from francois
         2. [6]HTTP Cache-Control extensions
         3. [7]Requirements (2.1)
         4. [8]Cache-Control: no-transform, and "dangerous" content
            (2.4)
         5. [9]CT proxies and "non browser" environments (3.2)
         6. [10]Roadmap
     * [11]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________



   <trackbot-ng> Date: 22 January 2008

   <hgerlach> yes I am here:-)

   <jo> scribe: bryan

Greetings from francois

   <hgerlach> for now or for future as well?

   <jo> Close ACTION-608

   Francois: I will chair the CT task, so we will close the AI related
   to finding one.

   <trackbot-ng> ACTION-608 Recruit a TF lead for CT closed

   Francois: Taskforce homepage needs update to show the change.

HTTP Cache-Control extensions

   Francois: Discussionussion today covers the CT document updates.
   ... Cache-control header changes check is still pending. No reply
   yet from other W3C groups.

   <jo> ACTION-603?

   <trackbot-ng> ACTION-603 -- Jo Rabin to find out how to liaise with
   HTTP NG work -- due 2008-01-03 -- OPEN

   <trackbot-ng>
   [12]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/603

     [12] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/603

   Francois to carry forward the AI for HTTP NG relationship.

   Francois: any other alternatives to dependence upon extensions?

   Heiko: maybe two step approach

   <jo> s/Francoise to/Francois: I will

   Jo: discusson with Rhys etc earlier resulted in decision at the
   time....
   ... ... it would be premature to publish something at that time.
   .mobi published a style guide draft related to this in the meantime.

   <jo> [13]http://dev.mobi/node/612

     [13] http://dev.mobi/node/612

   Jo: providing guidance on server config on how to achieve. W3C could
   do something similar, but we could also note in the document the
   option for a minimum control based upon headers.

   Heiko: we do not need headers for access to mobile OK sites.

   Jo: we need them if we want to make the proxy aware of the user
   agent's basic control preferences.

   Heiko: so this does not depend upon knowledge of mobile OK by the
   user agent

   Jo: correct

   <jo> [jo explained that the dotMobi paper describes use of Vary and
   no-transform which are pre-existing headers]

   Jo: three possible actions: one, to note that we can use
   no-transform without extensions, and vary header also.
   ... second, to publish a note that we can do something new
   consistent with .mobi style guide

   <jo> [3 possibilities are: a) do nothing, b) publish a short note on
   what could be done with existing headers, basically the same as the
   dotMobi style guide and c) include a note to this effect in the
   Guidelines document]

   Heiko: could combine with other approaches e.g. via powder and
   mobile OK, to define how the user knows about mobile OK sites

   Jo: there are two aspects: (1) how to know when to transcode, e.g.
   based upon heuristics as Sean mentioned earlier; (2) control aspects
   ... we can address the control aspects separately

   Francois: the control features are listed as to be defined, and we
   should make the values more precise, recommend something

   Jo: the document does need a summary of the proposed changes

   Francois: do we want to think about the values on the mailing list?

   Jo: we can summarize them and put text in the draft

   <jo> ACTION: Jo to add a section summarising the proposed values and
   proposed names to next draft of Guidelines [recorded in
   [14]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-622 - Add a section summarising the
   proposed values and proposed names to next draft of Guidelines [on
   Jo Rabin - due 2008-01-29].

Requirements (2.1)

   Francois: next topic, about requirements part
   ... re the editor's note, (is it needed); I think the section is
   valuable for the reader

   Jo: agrees, and proposes to make it a summary of features enabled by
   this spec; but it's a description then, not requirements

   Francois: yet its a description and maybe fits better in another
   section

   Jo: will recast the section as a summary

   <jo> ACTION: Recast the Requirements section as a Summary and make
   it accurate as compared with the details in section 4 [recorded in
   [15]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]

   <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - Recast

   <jo> ACTION: Jo to Recast the Requirements section as a Summary and
   make it accurate as compared with the details in section 4 [recorded
   in [16]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action03]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-623 - Recast the Requirements section
   as a Summary and make it accurate as compared with the details in
   section 4 [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-01-29].

   <jo> Close ACTION-604

   <trackbot-ng> ACTION-604 Elaborate current draft especially in the
   areas of requirements closed

Cache-Control: no-transform, and "dangerous" content (2.4)

   Francois: wondering if we can define dangerous content more
   precisely or we should remove the note

   <francois> Bryan: Before the call, I was writing some contents on
   the list. I think it's useful for us to note there are exceptions to
   the rules, but not go into details

   <jo> [17]Proxy States

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/080118#d2e237

   <francois> ... We should say clearly that whenever a Proxy does
   that, it MUST say so

   Francois: what about parallels with child protection?

   Jo: wanted to say that the proxy has certain functions that it will
   perform, and that there are cases in which it is acceptable if those
   functions are provided with active agreement
   ... agreement of the user and content provider, e.g. removing
   images. But we need to say something otherwise there will be
   misunderstandings in deployments.

   Francois: if we add extensions e.g. except-for, does that help here?

   Jo: the statement was written as a general statement, e.g. whether
   the proxy transformed content may rely upon pre-defined agreements

   Heiko: believes content blocking is a separate function and should
   not affect the controls via no-transform; how is content filtering
   related to transcoding

   Jo: believes filtering is not related

   Francois: agrees
   ... so what is the agreement, should we mention that there are
   exceptions?

   <jo> [jo used child protection as an analogy to try to justify the
   proxy intervening in transparent mode, but now regrets using that
   analogy :-(]

   Jo: if a proxy gets no-transform on its own, it should not do fix-up
   on its on; if there is no directive, it could fixup the content
   ... it should be possible to setup a "session" to operate in
   no-transform mode

   <hgerlach> sorry I have to leave for the doc, changed to mobile

   Jo: the proxy could become passive, e.g. upon no-transform
   reception, and a user interacting with the proxy instructs the proxy
   to no transform e.g. with a particular domain

   Francois: so there seems to be an exception to the rule in the
   section, is that what we want?
   ... we could continue this on the list

   <jo> ACTION: francois to initiate discuss on the exception wording
   ref dangerous content [recorded in
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action04]

   <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - francois

   <jo> ACTION: fran to initiate discuss on the exception wording ref
   dangerous content [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action05]

   <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - fran

   <francois> ACTION: me to initiate discuss on the exception wording
   ref dangerous content [recorded in
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action06]

   <francois> ACTION: me to initiate discuss on the exception wording
   ref dangerous content [recorded in
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action07]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-624 - Initiate discuss on the exception
   wording ref dangerous content [on Marcos Eguillor Fernandez - due
   2008-01-29].

   <jo> Close ACTION-624

   <trackbot-ng> ACTION-624 Initiate discuss on the exception wording
   ref dangerous content closed

   Heiko: add a topic, can POST responses be modified?

   <francois> ACTION: Daoust to initiate discuss on the exception
   wording ref dangerous content [recorded in
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action08]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-625 - Initiate discuss on the exception
   wording ref dangerous content [on Fran├žois Daoust - due 2008-01-29].

   Heiko: believes that only HEAD and GET responses are covered so far
   ... in section 3

   Jo: requests Heiko raise this on the list

CT proxies and "non browser" environments (3.2)

   Francois: are non-browser web applications beyond the scope of the
   document? How can a CT-aware proxy know this?
   ... should transformation occur in these cases?

   Jo: Bryan added this in contribution.
   ... J2ME clients often use HTTP thru proxies, the question is how to
   tell.

   <francois> Bryan: I can add some text on that.

   <francois> ... I would like to see this as part of the DD repository

   <francois> ... the only possibility is to track the user-agent

   Bryan: will contribute text on this

   <jo> ACTION: Bryan to contribute text on detection of non-browser
   user agent [recorded in
   [23]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action09]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-626 - Contribute text on detection of
   non-browser user agent [on Bryan Sullivan - due 2008-01-29].

   Francois: how can a CT proxy interact with a non-browser client
   user? Is the basic assumption that transform should not occur in
   non-browser environments?

   Jo: agrees, our focus should be limited to browsing

   Bryan: there are other use cases where CT functions will be useful
   also

   Jo: in browsing use cases, the the origin server needs to be
   CT-aware

   Bryan: agrees, the CT proxy should not break things

   <jo> [in order to stop image format manipulation etc.]

   <jo> [in non browsing use cases the use cases are even less clear]

   <jo> ACTION: Jo to make clear in the scope that we are talking
   browsing here [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action10]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-627 - Make clear in the scope that we
   are talking browsing here [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-01-29].

   Francois: we could recommend that in a CT-unaware / non-browser case
   the CT proxy should not get in the way

Roadmap

   Francois: would like to see the document move forward; not much more
   to change before FPWD, e.g. extension values, whether to use them or
   not...

   Jo: preference is to have a draft ASAP in Feb.

   Bryan: agrees

   Jo: will not be in the next week's call, and will try to get a new
   draft out by Friday; the group should review it, and set a goal for
   lengthy discussion in Seoul
   ... goal for FPWD decision in Seoul

   Francois: agrees, will update the roadmap based upon that

   <jo> ACTION: Jo to produce draft 1d by Friday [recorded in
   [25]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action11]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-628 - Produce draft 1d by Friday [on Jo
   Rabin - due 2008-01-29].

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Bryan to contribute text on detection of non-browser
   user agent [recorded in
   [26]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action09]
   [NEW] ACTION: Daoust to initiate discuss on the exception wording
   ref dangerous content [recorded in
   [27]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action08]
   [NEW] ACTION: fran to initiate discuss on the exception wording ref
   dangerous content [recorded in
   [28]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action05]
   [NEW] ACTION: francois to initiate discuss on the exception wording
   ref dangerous content [recorded in
   [29]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action04]
   [NEW] ACTION: Jo to add a section summarising the proposed values
   and proposed names to next draft of Guidelines [recorded in
   [30]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: Jo to make clear in the scope that we are talking
   browsing here [recorded in
   [31]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action10]
   [NEW] ACTION: Jo to produce draft 1d by Friday [recorded in
   [32]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action11]
   [NEW] ACTION: Jo to Recast the Requirements section as a Summary and
   make it accurate as compared with the details in section 4 [recorded
   in [33]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action03]
   [NEW] ACTION: me to initiate discuss on the exception wording ref
   dangerous content [recorded in
   [34]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action06]
   [NEW] ACTION: me to initiate discuss on the exception wording ref
   dangerous content [recorded in
   [35]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action07]
   [NEW] ACTION: Recast the Requirements section as a Summary and make
   it accurate as compared with the details in section 4 [recorded in
   [36]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [37]scribe.perl version 1.133
    ([38]CVS log)
    $Date: 2008/01/22 16:46:11 $

     [37] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [38] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2008 16:49:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 January 2008 16:49:46 GMT