Re: Comments on http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-mwabp-20091006/ ( LC-2265 LC-2266)

 Dear Arthur Barstow ,

The Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group has reviewed the comments you
sent [1] on the Last Call Working Draft [2] of the Mobile Web Application
Best Practices published on 6 Oct 2009. 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/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/BestPractices-2.0/ED-mobile-bp2-20091210.

Please review it carefully and let us know by email at
public-bpwg-comments@w3.org if you agree with it or not before 5 January
2010. 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/7C81CB51-3099-4E16-8F8F-E717D0FB6A6C@nokia.com
 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-mwabp-20091006/


=====

Your comment on Status of this Document:
> Re Status of the Document (SotD) section: given this document is  
> purely non-normative, why is this document "expected to become a W3C  
> Recommendation" rather than a Working Group note? For example, how  
> would this document ever be able to meet the following entrance  
> criteria for Proposed Recommendation:
> 
> [[
> http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#cfr
> 
> 2. Shown that each feature of the technical report has been
> implemented.
> ]]


Working Group Resolution (LC-2265):
We will follow the precedent set by various Recommendations which are
guidelines, e.g. the Mobile Web Best Practices, and have Exit Criteria
which shows that each Best Practice is implemented and therefore
implementable.

Precise Exit Criteria have not been agreed upon as of today. The group
expects to ask for at least two independently sourced implementations of
each Best Practice.


----

Your comment on A Related Reading (Non-Normative):
> Re the use of "Non-Normative" in the titles of Appendix A and B:  
> given the SotD clearly states the document is non-normative, it seems 
> 
> a bit redundant to restate it in the titles [hint: delete "(Non- 
> Normative)".


Working Group Resolution (LC-2266):
We agree and have removed "Non-Normative".

----

Received on Thursday, 17 December 2009 10:45:58 UTC