RE: [minutes] Thu 29 November teleconf

Hi,

Sorry for having missed it.  I was late 30 minutes and then there was
nobody - a short call indeed :-)

I just scanned the minutes.

Yes, I am willing to lead the TF as hopefully my commitment here will
allow it.

Further steps to be determined.
Next up is the cramming session with Phil and Dan.
Volunteers among those who said yes for helping out are welcome.

-- Kai


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Dominique 
> Hazael-Massieux
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 4:29 PM
> To: public-bpwg@w3.org
> Subject: [minutes] Thu 29 November teleconf
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The minutes of the (shortened) call of the BPWG teleconf held 
> today are available at:
> http://www.w3.org/2007/11/29-bpwg-minutes.html
> 
> and copied as text below.
> 
> Dom
> 
> [1]W3C
> 
>       [1] http://www.w3.org/
> 
>         Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference
> 
> 29 Nov 2007
> 
>    [2]Agenda
> 
>       [2] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2007Nov/0008.html
> 
>    See also: [3]IRC log
> 
>       [3] http://www.w3.org/2007/11/29-bpwg-irc
> 
> Attendees
> 
>    Present
>           Dom, kemp, miguel, jo, Magnus, abel, Shahriar, rob,
>           Ed_Mitukiewicz, SeanP, drooks, chaals
> 
>    Regrets
>           Bruno, PhilA, Adam, DanA, Bryan, Nacho, bindu_rao
> 
>    Chair
>           Jo
> 
>    Scribe
>           Aaron Kemp
> 
> Contents
> 
>      * [4]Topics
>          1. [5]Good standing
>          2. [6]CT Task force
>          3. [7]checker TF
>          4. [8]mobileOK Pro poll
>          5. [9]Accessility doc
>          6. [10]republication of mobileOK CR
>      * [11]Summary of Action Items
>      _________________________________________________________
> 
> Good standing
> 
>    jo: first off, good standing... for this charter, we'll be more
>    strict about maintaining records on good standing... wanted to make
>    sure everyone was aware of that...
>    ... things like, if you are a member of the group, you need to
>    answer to the surveys, come to teleconferences, etc... in the last
>    charter, we ended up with lots of regrets all the time
>    ... any comments about that?
> 
>    Magnus: i was a bit surprising to see how many were in bad standing
>    in the group... curious about how they got bad standing?
> 
>    <dom> [12]Current view of the group
> 
>      [12] http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=37584
> 
>    jo: i think it was the crossover from the old charter to the new
>    charter
> 
>    dom: not quite sure where the bad standing stats come from... i
>    think we should reset the flags and wait for us to define rules.
>    i'll clean up the list
> 
>    jo: anything else on good standing?
> 
> CT Task force
> 
>    <dom> [everybody is back in good standing for the time being]
> 
>    jo: reports from taskforces... from the content transformation
>    group: we're still looking for a leader of the group... a new draft
>    of the document should appear shortly (today/tomorrow)
> 
>    <jo> [13]CT Draft
> 
>      [13] 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-dr
afts/Guidelines/latest
> 
> checker TF
> 
>    jo: on to checker... sean is not here, so very briefly: a number of
>    bugs have been worked through, work continuing... target of january
>    for beta release
> 
> mobileOK Pro poll
> 
>    <jo> [14]Poll
> 
>      [14] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/37584/MobileOK-Pro/
> 
>    <dom> [15]results
> 
>      [15] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/37584/MobileOK-Pro/results
> 
>    jo: according to the mobile OK pro poll, the answer is a fairly
>    solid "yes"... since kai and archer are not on the call, 
> there's not
>    much we can say except that assuming we can find someone to act as
>    leader, it looks like it is going ahead
>    ... let's put it on hold until the next time kai is on the call to
>    see if he wants to lead the TF
>    ... has anyone had a chance to look at the accessibility document?
> 
> Accessility doc
> 
>    <jo> [16]Document
> 
>      [16] 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility
> /drafts/latest
> 
>    chaals: yes, i've sent some more comments, and think that it is
>    moving ahead steadily
> 
>    <dom> [17]Current latest version, dated Nov 25
> 
>      [17] 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility
> /drafts/ED-mwbp-wcag-20071125
> 
>    jo: my comment is that i'm not quite sure whether the target of the
>    document is clearly focused. it seems to be that it could 
> be about a
>    number of things and right now it's about a mixture of those things
> 
>    chaals: i have a similar concern, i think it needs to be clearer
>    about who it's for. i think there are some things being fixed up
>    that will help, but i think there is work to do.
>    ... i think it's a big chunk of work, but don't think there is need
>    for concern about the timeline, we raise issues and move forward
> 
>    jo: ok anything else? not sure where Alan is...
>    ... ok, any other business?
> 
> republication of mobileOK CR
> 
>    dom: i found a small but annoying bug in the mobile OK spec:
>    useragent string defined by the spec is not the one we had decided
>    on a few months ago.
>    ... given that websites are likely to fairly strictly match against
>    the string, while the error is minor, it is a fairly 
> serious bug. so
>    we are going to publish a new version tomorrow with a fix
> 
>    jo: ok thanks dom, so everyone make sure you are using the right
>    string
> 
> Summary of Action Items
> 
>    [End of minutes]
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 29 November 2007 16:49:03 UTC