Re: [Agenda] BPWG 2010-09-28

> With thanks to those who submitted implementation 
> reports, the time has come regretfully to accept that we
> have not received sufficient reports to progress this 
> document along Rec track.
>
> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: "Downgrade" CT
> Guidelines to a WG Note and request publication as
> such.

After all the time and effort invested in the CTG, this is a
most regrettable conclusion.

I cannot believe the lack of implementation reports is 
caused by an inability of the operators; after all, they
know very well what their deployed transcoders are 
capable of and how they are configured, have had largely
enough time to prepare themselves for the final version of
the CTG, filling ICS is part of the job in telecoms, and they
could draw some marketing advantage from being 
compliant with the guidelines. As for test suites, I am
convinced they exist at the transcoder vendors, since
otherwise how would they even check that their systems
implement what they are supposed to do?

I presume that no ICS are forthcoming because the main
parties have lost interest in the matter; the hot topic
currently is not browsing, nor supporting a wide spectrum
of mobile phones -- but apps and apps store for high-end
devices. 

All this is a bit sad, since

a) In several markets, the state of affairs regarding
transcoders is essentially as bad today as it was three
years ago (try Vodafone Portugal for one example). We 
remain without a formal guideline to compell bad citizens to
respect good practices in the mobile Web ecosystem.

b) There was a first wave of transcoding ten years ago
(making Web sites available to WAP 1 devices); the 
current one, initiated three years ago, is largely to make
desktop sites available to WAP 2 devices (driven by the
emergence of iPhone and "full-web-capable" phones). 
If history is any guide, there will be another game changer
in three years which will result in yet another wave of
transcoding -- perhaps something like converting evolved,
rich e-book content from tablet/reader formats to mobile 
phone HTML5-based formats. At that time, we will
just have an informational document, no experience with
recording and enforcing guidelines, nor any feedback on
their practicality or completeness, nor an evaluation of
some of the most contentious issues (such as HTTPS
rewriting), nor a process to incorporate changes entailed
by new technology.

I look forward to hearing how group members (especiallly
operators and transcoder vendors) will utilize the CTG,
even if only as a WG note.

E.Casais

Received on Tuesday, 28 September 2010 13:00:01 UTC