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

Re: Content Transformation Guidelines 1m (Rev 13) [was Re: Content Transformation Guidelines 1l (Rev 12) and Change List]

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 10:04:11 +0200
Message-ID: <4888377B.6040902@w3.org>
To: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
CC: public-bpwg-ct <public-bpwg-ct@w3.org>

Well, the conformance section needs to be pompous (and scary?) anyway ;-)

+1 for "conforming content deployment" and "conforming transformation 


Jo Rabin wrote:
> Thanks Francois, I'm wondering if we should distinguish "a conforming 
> proxy" from a "a conforming deployment" to take into account section 4. 
> My suggestion being that we have a "conforming content deployment" and a 
> "conforming transformation deployment" or does that sound even more 
> "pompous" :-)
> Jo
> On 23/07/2008 11:03, Francois Daoust wrote:
>> Thanks for the updated draft!
>> Jo Rabin wrote:
>> [...]
>>> @@TODO - Conformance Statement [Francois, please? pretty please?]
>> Given our schedule, the rechartering should be done and we should be 
>> able to publish the document as normative.
>> But the AC review on the rechartering is not over yet. I don't expect 
>> there will be any problem, but then it seems that problems arise each 
>> time we anticipate something will go smoothly :-(
>> That being said, let's suppose for a minute things go as planned for 
>> once...
>> We need a Conformance Statement, and the more precise the Conformance 
>> Statement, the better.
>> The Content Transformation Guidelines apply to two classes of products:
>>  1. Content Providers content (need to find a better name): "servers"
>>  2. Content Transformation proxies: "proxies"
>> Most of the guidelines apply to "proxies", but I think we should still 
>> have a conformance model for "servers", to emphasize the fact that all 
>> parties need to make some "efforts" to work together, and to allow 
>> each party to point the other one to the fact that they conform to the 
>> specification.
>> The document is incredibly well organized, both in terms of sections 
>> and in terms of content (for the coxswain, hip hip hurrey!):
>>  - Sections 3.1, 3.3 and 4 apply to "proxies"
>>  - Section 3.2 applies to "servers"
>> It is not mandatory, but we may want to reword all normative 
>> statements to start with "proxies" or "servers". It's already the case 
>> for most of them. There just remain a couple of guidelines that are 
>> either using a singular form instead of a plural, either using a 
>> passive form:
>>  e.g: in 3.3.1 Receipt of Cache-Control: no-transform
>>     "the response MUST remain unaltered"
>>     which could be rewritten as
>>     "proxies MUST leave the response unaltered"
>> We should also flag normative and informative parts in some way.
>> Below is a (poor) (pompous) attempt to write a Conformance Statement.
>> I would suggest to drop current section 2.3 and create a new normative 
>> section 3. Conformance.
>> -----
>> X. Conformance
>>  X.1 Classes of Products
>>   The Content Transformation Guidelines specification has two classes 
>> of products:
>>    - Content Providers content [any better name?] identified in the 
>> normative statements using the term *servers*
>>    - Content Transformation proxies identified in the normative 
>> statements using the term *proxies*
>>  X.2 Normative & Informative parts
>>   Normative parts are identified by the use of *(Normative)* next to 
>> the section name.
>>   Informative parts are identified by the use of *(Non-Normative)* 
>> next to the section name.
>>  X.3 Normative language for conformance requirements
>>   The key words must, must not, required, shall, shall not, should, 
>> should not, recommended, may, and optional in this Recommendation have 
>> the meaning defined in [RFC 2119].
>>  X.4 Servers conformance
>>   Servers are conforming to the Content Transformation Guidelines if 
>> they follow the statements defined in section 3.2 Server Response to 
>> Proxy
>>  X.5 Proxies conformance
>>   Proxies are conforming to the Content Transformation Guidelines if 
>> they follow the statements defined in sections 3.1 Proxy Forwarding of 
>> Request, 3.3 Proxy Forwarding of Response to User Agent, and 4. Testing
>> -----
>> HTH,
>> Francois.
Received on Thursday, 24 July 2008 08:04:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:06:29 UTC