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

Re: ACTION-831: Continue discussion of the title on the list (CT Guidelines; LC-2018)

From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:10:22 +0100
Message-ID: <48D396AE.5060405@mtld.mobi>
To: JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA <jmcf@tid.es>
CC: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>, Sean Patterson <SPatterson@Novarra.com>, public-bpwg-ct <public-bpwg-ct@w3.org>

they are intended "mainly" for proxy developers. As a result of last 
call comments we are likely to demote the application guidelines since 
their presence appears to suggest to readers that applications somehow 
have to behave differently. This is not the case.

Jo

On 19/09/2008 13:04, JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA wrote:
> I think the guidelines are not only for proxies but also for the applications themselves that should know how to behave in the presence of a CT proxy. That's something that it is missing from the title, but perhaps and app developer will not read such guidelines because he may infer, wrongly, that the guidelines are only for proxy implementors ...
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: public-bpwg-ct-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-ct-request@w3.org] En nombre de Francois Daoust
> Enviado el: viernes, 19 de septiembre de 2008 11:22
> Para: Jo Rabin
> CC: Sean Patterson; public-bpwg-ct
> Asunto: Re: ACTION-831: Continue discussion of the title on the list (CT Guidelines; LC-2018)
> 
> 
> Yes. It sounds good... and I can pronounce it ;)
> 
> I note that the point was more about restricting the scope to "Web
> Browsing" than to "Web" only, but I'm perfectly fine with not mentioning
> the "browsing" part.
> 
> I'd say this narrows down the choice to 2 titles (unless someone comes
> up with another good proposal that is):
>   1. The ubiquitous one: Content Transformation Proxies: Guidelines
>   2. The we-are-the-Mobile-Web-guys one: Guidelines for Mobile Web
> Content Transformation Proxies
> 
> Francois.
> 
> Jo Rabin wrote:
>> I think
>>
>> "Guidelines for Mobile Web Content Transformation Proxies"
>>
>> Previously we baulked at putting the word Mobile in, but actually we are
>> the Mobile Web (whatever that is) Best Practices Working Group, so it's
>> appropriate.
>>
>> Jo
>>
>> On 18/09/2008 22:15, Sean Patterson wrote:
>>> I've already gone on record as supporting number 1.  As Heiko brought
>>> up, number 2 sounds too much like a document that defines guidelines for
>>> CT proxies to talk to each other, so I think that rules it out.  (Also,
>>> I totally forgot about the unflattering acronym angle.)  As for 3, I
>>> like the idea of getting the word "Web" in there somewhere, but I
>>> couldn't really come up with a good title.  Examples:
>>>
>>> Content Transforming Web Proxies: Guidelines
>>> Content Transformation: Guidelines for Web Proxies
>>> Guidelines for Content Transformation Proxies for the Web
>>> Content Transformation for the Web: Guidelines for Proxies
>>> Content Transformation Guidelines for Web Proxies: The Untold Story
>>> Content Transformation: Guidelines for Proxies (doesn't have "web" in
>>> it)
>>> Content Transformation for Dummies (by Dan Appelquist)
>>> Content Transformation Proxies: Guidelines for the Web
>>> Web Content Transformation: Guidelines for Proxies
>>>
>>> I guess the second one is OK; I'm not sure if I like any of the others.
>>>
>>> Sean
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Francois Daoust [mailto:fd@w3.org]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 8:51 AM
>>>> To: Jo Rabin
>>>> Cc: Sean Patterson; public-bpwg-ct
>>>> Subject: Re: ACTION-831: Continue discussion of the title on the list
>>> (CT
>>>> Guidelines; LC-2018)
>>>>
>>>> OK, trying to move this forward
>>>> (funnily enough, I have this feeling this could have the exact
>>> opposite
>>>> effect...)
>>>>
>>>> To paraphrase Jo's words, because that's my new favorite hobby: "there
>>>> are many many titles we could think of".
>>>>
>>>> Following last call's discussion, let me try to narrow the list of
>>>> choices to 3 (bags of) possibilities:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Content Transformation Proxies: Guidelines
>>>> 2. Content Transformation Proxy Interoperability Guidelines
>>>> 3. Web Browsing Content Transformation Proxies: Guidelines
>>>>
>>>> I have the feeling that 3. is not completely English... The purpose is
>>>> to narrow the scope to content intended for Web browsing.
>>>>
>>>> IMHO:
>>>> - there is no way to to be complete in the title.
>>>> - "content transformation", "proxy" and "guidelines" must be in the
>>> title
>>>> - the fact that we're viewing CT-proxies from an external point of
>>> view
>>>> should be in the title. "interoperability" is a bit obscure (and I'm
>>> not
>>>> only mentioning that because I can't pronounce it ;-)). Plus the title
>>>> could be abbreviated to CT-PIG, and that's probably not the acronym we
>>>> want people to use when referring to the document.
>>>> - the fact that the scope of Content Transformation should be narrowed
>>>> to Web Browsing could be further explained in the Abstract.
>>>>
>>>> In short:
>>>> +1 to 1.
>>>> 0 to 2. (meaning I'm opened to alternative ideas)
>>>> -1 to 3. (meaning I doubt we can find any cool alternative, but, well,
>>>> I'd be happy to be proven wrong)
>>>>
>>>> Francois.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jo Rabin wrote:
>>>>> Hmmm, the possibilities are nearly endless. Here is another one:
>>>>>
>>>>> Content Transformation Proxy Interoperability Guidelines
>>>>>
>>>>> (putting the focus on the Proxy and with the possibility of demoting
>>> the
>>>>> stuff about origin servers to non-normative to lessen the appearance
>>> of
>>>>> creating a profile of HTTP or creating a protocol)
>>>>>
>>>>> Jo
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/09/2008 14:17, Francois Daoust wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks for this long list of choices, Sean.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> About the long title in 10., I would even complete it with
>>>>>> "communication", because what we're trying to achieve here is to
>>>>>> define ways for Content Providers and Content Transformation
>>> Proxies
>>>>>> to communicate with each other.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Content Transformation by HTTP Proxies: Communication Guidelines
>>> for
>>>>>> Content Providers and Content Transformation Proxies"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ... but I don't quite like the result. I'm merely mentioning it in
>>>>>> case someone comes up with a better idea that captures the abstract
>>>>>> more precisely.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That being said, I'd go for 12. as well, which also has the
>>> advantage
>>>>>> of not changing the title too radically.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Francois.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sean Patterson wrote:
>>>>>>> In LC-2018 it is suggested the title "Content Transformation
>>>>>>> Guidelines" is too generic and uninitiated readers would really
>>> not
>>>>>>> have any clue that the CT Guidelines refer to content
>>> transformation
>>>>>>> using an HTTP proxy server for (typically) mobile devices.  I can
>>> see
>>>>>>> the point and on the CT call on last Tuesday, the consensus seemed
>>> to
>>>>>>> be that a more descriptive name would be nice if we could come up
>>>>>>> with a good one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here are some suggestions from LC-2018, from the teleconference,
>>> and
>>>>>>> a few that I came up with:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. Mobile Web Content Transformation (from LC-2018)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. Content Transformation for Mobile Presentation (from LC-2018)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3. Content Adaptation Guidelines
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 4. Content Transformation by Proxies
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 5. Content Transformation by HTTP Proxies
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 6. Content Transformation by HTTP Proxies: Guidelines
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 7. Guidelines for Content Transformation by HTTP Proxies
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 8. Guidelines for Content Transformation Proxies
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 9. Content Transformation Orientation Guide
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 10. Content Transformation by HTTP Proxies:  Guidelines for
>>> Content
>>>>>>> Providers and Operators of Content Transformation Proxies (in case
>>> we
>>>>>>> want a really long title)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 11. Guidelines for Operation of and Interaction with Content
>>>>>>> Transformation Proxies
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 12. Content Transformation Proxies: Guidelines
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 13. Content Transformation by HTTP Proxies for Limited Browsers:
>>>>>>> Guidelines
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In most of the above, we could also replace the word "proxies"
>>> with
>>>>>>> "proxy servers".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In a previous call I remember that we discussed adding "mobile" to
>>>>>>> the title and decided against it because the CT Guidelines did not
>>>>>>> necessarily only have to apply to mobile devices.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With the word "guidelines" there are several options: put it the
>>>>>>> beginning of the title (e.g., 11), put it at the end (e.g., the
>>>>>>> current title), make it a subtitle (e.g., 6), or just leave it off
>>>>>>> altogether (e.g., 4).  There are lots of combinations that I
>>> haven't
>>>>>>> enumerated above.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think I'm partial to 8 or 12.  10 is really not that bad
>>> (although
>>>>>>> others may disagree with me) if we want a more descriptive title.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sean
>>>>>>>
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 19 September 2008 12:13:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 19 September 2008 12:13:51 GMT