[agenda] CT Call 2 December 2008

Here is the agenda for tomorrow's call.

I propose that we start by striking a few supposedly easy topics before 
we get to the core of the remaining stuff.

Francois.


-----
Chair: François
Staff Contact: François
Known regrets: none

Date: 2008-12-02T1500Z for 60mn
Phone: +1.617.761.6200, +33.4.89.06.34.99, +44.117.370.6152
Conference code: 2283 ("BCTF") followed by # key
IRC channel: #bpwg on irc.w3.org, port 6665.

Latest draft:
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/081107


1. Test the effect of HEAD Requests on Various Servers
-----
Thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0059.html
Doc:
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/081107#sec-applicable-HTTP-mehtods

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: No identified problem associated with switching a 
HEAD request to a GET request, other than the fact that server 
statistics are impacted. No text change in 4.1.1 on that regard.

... and close ACTION-710 on Francois.


2. LC-2097 - Review of OPES work
-----
Thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0045.html

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Ref-2097 resolve yes and add a section under 1.3 
scope noting that OPES RFC 3238 is relevant to this work and has been 
reviewed.


3. Editorial comments from Eduardo
-----
Thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0019.html

- action Jo to incorporate the editorial remarks in next version of the 
draft?


4. LC-2050 - Restructuring, recoding, optimizing
-----
Jo's changelog at:
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/2050
- we had resolved to mention we are only talking about restructuring.
- while preparing the new draft, Jo thought it did not make sense anymore.
- agreed?

... and close old ACTION-832 on Sean


5. Cached responses and pagination
-----
Thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0023.html
Doc:
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/081107#sec-serving-cached-responses

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: replace SHOULD by MUST in "and [proxies] SHOULD 
provide a simple means of retrieving a fresh copy"


6. Validation against formal published grammar (4.2.8.1)
-----
Thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0037.html
Doc:
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/081107#sec-alteration-of-response

Conclusion?


7. Alteration of header fields (4.1.5)
-----
Thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0019.html
Doc:
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/081107#sec-altering-header-values

- "Proxies SHOULD NOT change headers other than User-Agent and 
Accept(-*) headers[...]"
... inconsistent with 4.1.6 since the CT proxy is already asked to add 
X-Forwarded-For and Via headers and to *change* them (more specifically, 
to complete their values) if they are already defined.
- Several other headers could have to be changed by the CT-proxy 
(Content-Length for instance)
- What are trying to say here?

... and close ACTION-843 on Jo


8. Testing
-----
Thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0024.html
Doc:
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/081107#sec-testing

- action someone to propose some text to clarify the intent?


9. LC-2040 - On properly defining the X-Device-* headers
-----
Thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0062.html
Doc:
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/081107#sec-original-headers
Last Call comment:
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/2040

- Stick to "existing practice" or define the header appropriately?
- I note we also reference the X-Forwarded-For header.

... and close ACTION-879 on Francois.


10. HTTPS links rewriting
-----
Threads:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0063.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0065.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Dec/0007.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-comments/2008OctDec/0007.html

- Security problems arise with links rewriting, whether links are in 
HTTP or HTTPS, because of a change of origin that enable cross-site 
scripting attacks.
- Add a "Security considerations" section?
- Specific HTTPS guidelines?

... and close ACTION-860, ACTION-864 on Jo
... and close ACTION-859 on Francois


11. Mandating respect of some heuristics
-----
Thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0080.html

- should a mobile CT proxy be allowed to transform content that was 
developed with mobile in mind?
- forbid restructuring and recoding in the cases mentioned by Dom?
- allow exceptions to the rules as proposed by Eduardo?
- add an equivalent to section 4.1.5.4 on responses?


12. WML and the guidelines
-----
Threads:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0068.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0071.html

- Mostly merged with previous topic
- Amend the text on http-equiv not to mention specifically *HTML* content?


13. Implementation Conformance Statement
-----
Thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0078.html

- Improvements? Comments?


14. Review actions
-----
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/products/12


15. AOB
-----

Received on Monday, 1 December 2008 13:37:49 UTC