Minutes of the call from 2008-02-20

Minutes are found at http://www.w3.org/2008/02/20-bpwg-minutes.html

Below as text.
--Kai



W3C
- DRAFT -
Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference
20 Feb 2008

See also: IRC log
Attendees

Present
    Kai, PhilA, Alan, DRooks, Jo(Lurking)
Regrets
Chair
    Kai
Scribe
    PhilA

Contents

    * Topics
         1. mobileOK Pro Tests document
         2. Next Steps
    * Summary of Action Items

 

 

<trackbot-ng> Date: 20 February 2008

<Kai> Are folks on IRC joining the call?

<scribe> scribe: PhilA

<scribe> scribeNick:PhilA
mobileOK Pro Tests document

Kai: let's begin... Alan, can you restate the point you made on the
list?

Alan: Firstly that we should be clear whether we're going to be limited
by BP or if we're going to go beyond the BP
... We can say that mOK goes beyond BP but they'll need to be made aware
of that
... I think some Basic tests already go beyond BP
... I think it's going to be a mistake to use the BP names for the names
of the tests is the latter goes beyond the former. May we could just use
numbers
... and then say that this test relates to or is inspired by [BP]

Kai: I think you're right
... we should flag where we go beyond the BP
... we're trying to be educational. Maybe we can say here's the BP but
look you can be even better
... let's not confuse the issue, we're chartered to be based on the
Basic test

Alan: I understood that we're creating the basis for a label. If we're
going to go beyond BP then maybe we end up with an appendix to BP

kai: We'll need to reference/flag

Further discussion on this point

<Zakim> jo, you wanted to say what I just said in an email to the list

Jo: I don't see that there's a need to be very strict about this. If
there's something that simply isn't mentioned in BP and the test was way
off the mark, then we'd have to say that Pro had gone too far
... but there are lots of cases where you can interpret the BPs and
retain the spirit of the BP by giving more specific conditions
... I don't think you should see the BPs as a prescriptive list of
things to be testable

<Kai> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: If anything within the tests goes beyond what
is listed in the Best Practices, it should be clearly flagged within the
test as a recommendation for further considertation. Furthermore we may
later produce a separate document stemming from these changes.

Jo: I see BPs as more of a fireside chat. "say use caching".. and then
be ready in the tests to explain what that actually means with limits

Kai: When we notice something that is not quite right, then I think we
should flag it. We may decide to remove those flags in the doc but we
should flag it for discussion within the full WG

Jo: That seems very sensible
... For Basic it's water under the bridge

Kai: Bryan may want to take some of our commnets up in BP2
... I'd like to move on...
... I am creating an editor's draft version of the doc we've been
working on on Google docs
(http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=dft77cn8_15dxsxg5hf&hl=en)

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: That editing of the doc is now in Kai's hands and
the shared document on Google Docs is no longer the active document

RESOLUTION: That editing of the doc is now in Kai's hands and the shared
document on Google Docs is no longer active

kai: The other thing is the charter. I sent a new version to the group.
Francois has created the group home page and included the amended
charter. That might be a problem as it hasn't been approved by the group

PhilA; Is there stuff we should be doing between now and this time next
week?

Kai: I don't think so, things have been done
Next Steps

PhilA: Presenting the doc to the group is likely to generate action
items for us

kai: Forgot that we want to ask for FPWD when we submit this doc

<Kai> 04 01PROPOSED RESOLUTION: If anything within the tests goes beyond
what is listed in the Best Practices, it should be clearly flagged
within the test as a recommendation for further considertation.
Furthermore we may later produce a separate document stemming from these
changes.

+1

<Kai> RESOLUTION: If anything within the tests goes beyond what is
listed in the Best Practices, it should be clearly flagged within the
test as a recommendation for further considertation. Furthermore we may
later produce a separate document stemming from these changes.

Kai: So getting the doc edited and FPWD is the next step
... Can we share the editing?

PhilA: We can pass control between people

Kai: Yeah that's a pain
... Let me see how I get on
... AOB?

<Kai> Francois, how do I close this properly?
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2008/02/20 09:58:42 $
Scribe.perl diagnostic output
[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133  of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51  
Check for newer version at
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/lets/let's/
Succeeded: s/sme/some/
Succeeded: s/otherr/other/
Found Scribe: PhilA
Inferring ScribeNick: PhilA
Found ScribeNick: PhilA
Default Present: Phil_Archer, +03491121aaaa, alanchuter, jo,
+0783371aabb
Present: Kai PhilA Alan DRooks Jo(Lurking)
Found Date: 20 Feb 2008
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/02/20-bpwg-minutes.html
People with action items: 


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]

Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2008 10:04:54 UTC