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

[minutes] Thursday 28 February 2008 Teleconf

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:29:35 +0100
Message-ID: <47C6E16F.6070505@w3.org>
To: public-bpwg@w3.org

Hi,

The minutes for today's call are available at:
http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-bpwg-minutes.html
... and copied as text below.

Unless Zakim tries to confuse us, someone attended the call and is 
listed as "1.781.267.aaaa". If you attended the call but are not listed 
in the Present list below, let me know!

Francois.

New actions:
ACTION: achuter Discuss on the list THEMATIC_CONSISTENCY
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]
ACTION: Dan to create an issue to start bringing together potential test 
cases.
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-bpwg-minutes.html#action03]
ACTION: daoust to make sure next calls will stick to european time 
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]


28 Feb 2008

    [2]Agenda

       [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2008Feb/0157.html

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-bpwg-irc

Attendees

    Present
           AlanT, DKA, Jeff, Kai, Magnus, MartinJ,
           Shah, Yeliz, abel, achuter, adam, francois, jo, miguel, nacho

    Regrets
           Dom, drooks, kemp, srowen, EdM, rob, Tony, chaals, hgerlach

    Chair
           Jo

    Scribe
           DKA

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]US clock change
          2. [6]Decision on Zaragoza
          3. [7]Task force report: Content Transformation
          4. [8]MobileOK Pro
          5. [9]Korea F2F Agenda Discussion
          6. [10]Accessibility
          7. [11]BP 2.0
      * [12]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________

    Topics: Administrivia

US clock change

    <jo> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: BPWG Call to stay on Euro Time till March
    30th

    Jo: We won't be having a call next week - the next call will be the
    13th.
    ... Proposal to stay on european time - GMT - during the US time
    change.

    <jo> RESOLUTION: BPWG Call to stay on Euro Time till March 30th

Decision on Zaragoza

    <francois> ACTION: daoust to make sure next calls will stick to
    european time [recorded in
    [13]http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-675 - Make sure next calls will stick
    to european time [on Fran├žois Daoust - due 2008-03-06].

    Jo: We had to make a decision quickly and the results of the poll
    point to 16-20 of June.
    ... Registration will start soon.

    Nacho: the formal decisions have happened from both bp and dd
    groups. Right now I'm waiting for some information and I will send
    the details to the list next week.

    Jo: Thanks.

Task force report: Content Transformation

    <francois> [14]latest draft

      [14] 
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/080227

    Francois: I would like to present the latest draft to the working
    group.
    ... Summarizing: what needs to be done before we go to fpwd and
    afterwards.
    ... We had a lot of discussion on scope and this is what we agreed.
    ... First, [burst of music], extending http for communications
    between the different actors is not the way to go - it's beyond our
    charter and http isn't open for modifications - not flexible enough.
    ... The big CT picture could take into account OMA DPE, W3C DCCI, or
    Powder.
    ... So we decided to stick with existing technologies and try to
    avoid new http headers. It's not settled if we need one or not at
    the moment.
    ... As legacy browsers are the target for the moment, we decided to
    leave the browser aside and so communications between CT proxy and
    user must be through web pages. Future browsers may add
    cache-control no-transform header.
    ... These are the two main points. Now there are 2 things that need
    to be answered before fpwd.
    ... First is regarding the way the CT proxy works. We haven't had
    time in the last call to take a resolution. How should the proxy
    work - should it do "content tasting" - sending an http request,
    looking at the answer to see if it is correct?
    ... Does it have to change the user agent? If there is no need to
    change the user agent, then we probably don't need any additional
    http headers.

    <jeffs> "tasting" should read "testing"

    Francois: Second big question: something introduced in last draft -
    use of POWDER. POWDER could be used on the server side.
    ... do we have a dependency on powder or do we just want to
    reference powder. It doesn't exist - it's at fpwd at the moment. So
    we might run into the same problem we've had with xhtml basic -
    waiting for Powder.

    <Zakim> Kai, you wanted to say that this depends on how DRs are
    discoverable

    Kai: Info on POWDER - we have 2 types of documents, the web resoruce
    and the description that describes the web resource.
    ... We are discussing URI schemes.
    ... wrt content tasting, 2 ways to do it - look at the resource
    itself or look at the description resources. Because of the problems
    we've discovered with numerical URIs, it is under discussion to
    close off tasting through tasting descripion resources but this is
    not prefered.

    Jo: Any other questions on POWDER or CT?
    ... I think we're going to spend some time in Korea discussing these
    issues.
    ... We may not be able to take resolutions in Korea but we will be
    able to make some progress in workshopping these issues.

MobileOK Pro

    Kai: draft is finished. It's out there, please look at it. In the
    mail I posted I mentioned the task force would ask the main group to
    make this a fpwd.
    ... also emulator code has been pasdsed to Dave Rooks.
    ... Progress has been good.

    Jo: We'll be addressing this also in Korea.

    <francois> [15]mobileOK Pro doc

      [15] 
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/mobileOKPro/drafts/ED-mobileOK-pro10-tests-20080228

Korea F2F Agenda Discussion

    <jo> [16]Draft Agenda for F2F

      [16] http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd3jk8v_89f6vrqk9w

    <francois> DKA: I put together an agenda. Problem is we'll have a
    restricted number of participants. I included some time to get input
    from Korean people

    <francois> ... to see what would be useful to have in BP2.0

    <francois> ... some time for the CT TF, mobileOK Pro TF

    <francois> ... The more time we can spend flushing things in
    documents, the better

    <francois> ... as opposed to taking resolutions as we'll be a small
    number of participants

Accessibility

    Jo: Where did we get to?

    Alan: Tab order.

    <achuter>
    [17]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/d
    rafts/ED-mwbp-wcag-20080129/mwbp-wcag20.html#TAB_ORDER

      [17] 
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/ED-mwbp-wcag-20080129/mwbp-wcag20.html#TAB_ORDER

    Jo: Any comments?
    ... Tables_alternatives

    Alan: this one is odd but some users might find it more complicated.
    ... This is in the mobile context use an alternative not on all
    contexts.

    Kai: [censored]

    Jo: We need to say that there is no added benefit for users with
    disabilities and move on. I think we should remain silent on whether
    it makes it more difficult for users with disabilities.
    ... let's move on to tables_layout

    Alan: there are 2 aspecst - using a table for layout might cause
    incorrect reading order.
    ... If you use tables for layout, it's difficult for the user to
    modifyt the layout by using their own stylesheet.

    Jo: Most mobile browsers do support tables so the comment about
    non-support might not be correct.

    <jeffs> do not use tables for layout

    Jo: Moving on to nested_tables

    +1

    tables_nested

    Alan: if tables are nested for layout then for a screen reading user
    it makes it very confusing. So it's best avoided.

    Jo: Other comments on tables_nested?
    ... Tables_support?
    ... No added benefit.

    Alan: yes.

    Jo: testing.

    [long pause]

    Jo: It helps to some degree but it won't give you a benefit.
    ... Other comments?
    ... Thematic Consistency?
    ... I think this could do with more. Can we put a pin in this
    discussion and we can raise an issue on the list to discuss it?

    Alan: the concept is the same - access the same content from a range
    of devices and also with a range of user abilities.

    <achuter> ACTION: achuter Discuss on the list THEMATIC_CONSISTENCY
    [recorded in
    [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]

    <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-676 - Discuss on the list
    THEMATIC_CONSISTENCY [on Alan Chuter - due 2008-03-06].

    Jo: The point of the best practice is the other way around - what
    we're saying you shouldn't do is to provide pages with different
    meanings from the same URI depending on the circumstances of the
    access. Example of bbc.co.uk/mobile which provides mobile-friendly
    content if you're on a mobile devices and instructions for use of
    mobile if you're on a PC - this is not best practice.
    ... Moving on - URIs.

    Alan: Users especially with motor disabilities might have difficulty
    typing them in the same way that a user of a mobile device has
    trouble typing them on a keypad.

    Jo: Anybody got anything else?
    ... Moving on - use of color.

    <jeffs> add anything on greyscale?

    <Kai> if you are curious
    [19]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/mobileOKPro/dra
    fts/ED-mobileOK-pro10-tests-20080228#use_of_color

      [19] 
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/mobileOKPro/drafts/ED-mobileOK-pro10-tests-20080228#use_of_color

    Alan: User of the mobile device might not see the color because of
    bad ambient lighting, other users might not see the color at all
    either because they can't see or because they have color perception
    deficits. So it's comon cause.

    <Emmanuel> I am only on IRC not dialed into call

    Jeff: Putting in 2 worth - choosing colors that go to greyscale
    properly.

    Jo: We don't have that in BP1 but maybe we could put it in BP2.

    Jeff: Yes I tell my students there.

    I suggest you send something to the list on that, Jeff?

    <jeffs> will send something to list on color choices and decay to
    greyscale

    Alan: it's not about using high contrast colors but rather not using
    colors to convey information (e.g. red means stop).

    Thanks.

    Jo: We had a formula in the BP document but we removed it at one
    point.

    <achuter> Under URIS change d in WCAG 1.0. to 2.0

    Yeliz: UI wanted to say about keep URIs of entry points short - that
    should refer to 2.0 not 1.0.

    Jo: Valid Markup - last one of the document.

    Alan: This one corresponds to a 1.0 checkpoint but at 2.0 they
    removed requirement for valid code at one stage and then changed it
    to "Well formed" markup.
    ... The arguments in the wcag working group is that it doesn't give
    accessibilty benefit. Does it bring a benefit or not?

    Jo: I don't think it's for us to judge.
    ... It does give you WCAG (2.0) compliance.

    Alan: Yes but it's hard to justify whether it brings benefits to
    users with disabilities.

    Jo: We're done with that document for now.
    ... You're able to make changes now you've been waiting to make.
    Yeliz made some contributions and those can be folded in as well.
    OK?
    ... Thanks again, Alan.
    ... BP 2.0 - discussion of recent inputs on the mailing list.

BP 2.0

    DKA: Have RIT done anything on scripting that we could bring into
    next week's f2f?

    Jeff: I don't know that I have anything concrete to contribute until
    what scripting.
    ... Seperate javascript into seperate files for PC sites and for
    mobile it makes more sense to put it inline.
    ... I'll try to get some some written materials to the list by the
    weekend.

    <dom> [Adam's mail on AJAX being an opportunity to reduce network
    access problems took me aback, but sounds very interesting to me]

    <dom> [dom's random thought of the day]

    Adam: one suggestion was not to build the DOM on device but to send
    the whole html vs building the DOM on the device - trade offs there
    where it might make sens to do some experimentation.

    <jeffs> will go for obvious general-level javascript BP, like inline
    vs separate files etc...

    DKA: that sounds relevant.

    <jo> [in response to Dom's, Jo's random thought is that the best
    place to take into account "dynamic" properties of the device is in
    the client and not to use OMA DPE]

    Adam: I could do a simple test case for this.

    DKA: Could Francois set up a space for the bp 2.0 doc test cases?

    <scribe> ACTION: Dan to create an issue to start bringing together
    potential test cases. [recorded in
    [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-bpwg-minutes.html#action03]

    <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-677 - Create an issue to start bringing
    together potential test cases. [on Daniel Appelquist - due
    2008-03-06].

    Jo: I'm going to end the meeting there.

    <Kai> Enjoy Seoul!! I would like to be there.

    Jo: That's it. Bye!

    <abel> bye

    <yeliz> byee

    Bye!

    <Magnus> yes

    <miguel> bye

    <francois> zakmi, list attendees

    <Magnus> oops i left

Summary of Action Items

    [see top of email]

    [End of minutes]
      _________________________________________________________


     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [24]scribe.perl version 1.133
     ([25]CVS log)
     $Date: 2008/02/28 16:22:48 $

      [24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
      [25] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 28 February 2008 16:29:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 28 February 2008 16:29:48 GMT