RE: [minutes] CT Call 6 january 2009

Regarding "Mandating some respect of some heuristics" [1]:

    <francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Specifically call out the heuristics
    identified by Dom as SHOULDs and separate them from the other
    heuristics that are not so strongly indicative of intentional mobile
    content creation

In general, I think this is a good idea, however we should specifically
call out the situations where the "SHOULD" can be violated.  Here is a
possible guideline:

Unambiguously mobile sites should not be transformed by a CT proxy
except:
*  in cases where the transformation is needed in order to make the site
useable and/or display properly on the user's device, or
*  if the user has given explicit permission to the CT proxy to apply
transformations to mobile sites.

(The definition of "umabiguously mobile" would be the one that Dom
suggested; i.e., XHTML MP, application/vnd.wap.xhtml+xml, etc.)

Why would the user want a CT proxy to apply transformations to mobile
sites?
*  The user may want to see a toolbar to make it easier to access CT
features (e.g., bookmarks, history, etc.).
*  The user may want links to be rewritten so that all content continues
to flow through the CT proxy (even if there is no visual change to the
content).  This avoids the problem of accidentally following a link to a
regular desktop page that can crash the browser and/or phone.  This is
especially a problem on mobile versions of blog sites where a lot of the
links are to desktop content.  For example, when I go directly to
mobile.osnews.com (no CT proxy) and click on a link in one of the
entries, it will frequently lock up my phone because the linked-to page
is too big.  (My phone is a couple of years old and doesn't have a lot
of memory.)


Sean


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0080.html

Received on Monday, 12 January 2009 23:17:05 UTC