Re: Preservation of Content Ownership ( LC-2090)

 Dear Luca Passani ,

The Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group has reviewed the comments you
sent [1] on the Last Call Working Draft [2] of the Content Transformation
Guidelines 1.0 published on 1 Aug 2008. Thank you for having taken the time
to review the document and to send us comments!

The Working Group's response to your comment is included below, and has
been implemented in the new version of the document available at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ct-guidelines-20091006/.

Please review it carefully and let us know by email at
public-bpwg-comments@w3.org if you agree with it or not before 6 November
2009. In case of disagreement, you are requested to provide a specific
solution for or a path to a consensus with the Working Group. If such a
consensus cannot be achieved, you will be given the opportunity to raise a
formal objection which will then be reviewed by the Director during the
transition of this document to the next stage in the W3C Recommendation
Track.

Thanks,

For the Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group,
Dominique Hazaël-Massieux
François Daoust
W3C Staff Contacts

 1. http://www.w3.org/mid/48C78B27.8050601@eunet.no
 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/


=====

Your comment on 4.3.6 Proxy Decision to Transform:
> Hi, I think that CTG should mention the fact that, in case of 
> transcoding, no extra content should be injected without the consent of
> 
> the original content owner. The idea is to avoid that W3C 
> protocols/guidelines implicitly endorse the attempt by  those who  
> manage the transcoder to monetize on the effort/investment of other 
> people. Of course, there is also a point that injecting extra content 
> will invariably affect usability negatively and as such should be
> avoided.
> 
> I suggest the following addition:
> 
> "4.3.6.3 Injection of external content
> In its effort to optimise the user experience of non-mobile optimised 
> sites, a proxy *should not* inject extra content into the transcoded 
> pages, where the term 'extra content' refers to text, links, banners  
> and other multimedia content which is not available on the original 
> untranscoded page. Addition of links aimed at implementing pagination 
> and navigational shortcuts is admissible.
> 
> Note: For clarity, it is emphasised that W3C does not endorse injection
> 
> of third-party content into a transcoded page without the explicit 
> consent of the content owner"
> 
> Can this comment be added to the tracking system?
> 
> Thank you
> 
> Luca Passani


Working Group Resolution (LC-2090):
The goals of this specification is to provide guidance to Content
Transformation proxies and Content Providers as to how inter-work when
delivering Web content. In other words, the guidelines are focused on
defining means for the various actors of the delivery chain to communicate
their intent and expectations.

The details of how a Content Transformation proxy performs restructuring
operations is out of scope of this specification. The notion of user
experience is by essence vague, and one design may be regarded as providing
a better user experience by some and a lesser one by someone else.

The Working Group notes that alteration and thus injection of extra
content is forbidden in responses served with a Cache-Control:
no-transform.

Content Providers who do not want their content to be altered in any way
should use this directive.

----

Received on Tuesday, 6 October 2009 15:34:25 UTC