RE: [agenda] CT Teleconference Tuesday 18 February 2008

My regrets for tomorrow - I'm in an all day meeting.

thanks,

Magnus Lönnroth
Head of PDU SDP
Development Unit Multimedia Products
Ericsson AB
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-bpwg-ct-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-bpwg-ct-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Francois Daoust
> Sent: den 18 februari 2008 15:28
> To: public-bpwg-ct
> Subject: [agenda] CT Teleconference Tuesday 18 February 2008
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This is the proposed agenda for tomorrow's teleconf.
> It includes some of my suggestions, but note they are nothing 
> more than 
> "stupid suggestions" to trigger ideas:
> 
> 
> Chair: François
> Staff Contact: François
> Known regrets: none
> 
> Date: 2008-02-18T1500Z 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.
> 
> Current draft:
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-dr
> afts/Guidelines/080124
> 
> 
> Agenda:
> 
> 1. Introduction
> ---------------
> - we should present our draft to the WG before Seoul's F2F, for 
> validation/comments and hopefully publication as First Public 
> Working Draft.
> - goal is to ground our guidelines on reality.
> 
> 
> 2. Grounding on reality
> -----------------------
> - "available" technologies:
>      HTTP Accept, Cache-Control, Vary, Via headers
>      Extensions to Cache-Control (I tend to think that's 
> already "new" 
> technology...)
> - ... and what else?
> - we may reference "new" technologies as possible ways to improve the 
> situation in the future: OMA-DPE for instance?
> - in practice, CT-proxies do more than just CT of content 
> "with a view 
> to making it more suitable for mobile presentation". Terms and 
> conditions exist. Headers/Footers may be "compulsory", ... That's 
> probably beyond the scope of the document, but that means 
> "Cache-Control: no-transform" will never be totally respected.
> 
> 
> 3. Client Origination of request (§3.1)
> ---------------------------------------
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-dr
> afts/Guidelines/080124#d0e306
> - let go of all the HTTP CT-proxy control mechanisms in the request, 
> save, possibly the Cache-Control: no-transform directive?
> - replace HTTP control mechanisms with an options-oriented approach, 
> leaving the practical implementation of the approach as CT-dependent? 
> (for legacy browsers, that's a WEB interface, in the future... using 
> OMA-DPE?)
> 
> 
> 4. Proxy Receipt, Forwarding or Response to a Request (§3.2)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-dr
> afts/Guidelines/080124#d0e339
> - remove all mentions to Cache-Control extensions?
> - remove indications of "I will transform"?
> - use a generic "X-Modified-Headers" (or any other name) HTTP 
> header to 
> reference the original headers modified by the CT-proxy and in 
> particular the original User-Agent?
> 
> 
> 5. Server Response to Proxy (§3.3)
> ----------------------------------
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-dr
> afts/Guidelines/080124#d0e501
> - stick to Cache-Control: no-transform?
> - recommend the use of the HTTP Vary header
> 
> 
> 6. Proxy Receipt and Forwarding of Response from Server (§3.4)
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-dr
> afts/Guidelines/080124#d0e581
> - anything else to say?
> 
> 
> 7. Proxy Response to Client (§3.5)
> ----------------------------------
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-dr
> afts/Guidelines/080124#d0e594
> - mention of "mandatory" transformations that may be done by 
> a CT-proxy 
> as agreed by terms & conditions and/or as imposed by carriers?
> 
> 
> François.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Monday, 18 February 2008 21:18:02 UTC