W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > January 2008

[minutes] Thursday 10 January Teleconf

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 17:24:24 +0100
To: public-bpwg <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1199982265.6887.60.camel@DOUST-LAPTOP>

Hi,

The minutes of today's teleconf are available at:
http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html

and copied as text below.

Fran├žois.


10 Jan 2008

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2008Jan/0011.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Shahriar, abel, Miguel, francois, Bryan_Sullivan, jo, Dom,
          Heiko, Ed_Mitukiewicz, PhilA, Jason, chaals, magnus, SeanP

   Regrets
          Kai, DKA, Adam, RobFinean, Roland, nacho, Murari, MartinJ,
          AlanTai

   Chair
          Jo

   Scribe
          Chaals

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Administrivia
         2. [6]Task Forces
         3. [7]Content Transformation TF
         4. [8]Checker Group
         5. [9]mobileOK Pro
         6. [10]Mobile Accessibility
         7. [11]Best Practices 2
         8. [12]Other Business?
     * [13]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________



   <trackbot-ng> Date: 10 January 2008

   <hgerlach> hi all

   <jo> [14]Agenda

     [14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2008Jan/0011.html

   <scribe> Scribe: Chaals

   <scribe> ScribeNick: chaals

Administrivia

   <dom> [15]Good Standing rules now are applied

     [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-bpwg/2008Jan/0006.html

   <dom> [16]Good Standing Rules

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/GoodStanding.html

   FD: Good standing rules apply from 1 january. You can track your
   status, check the rules, ...

   <dom> [17]Good Standing Tracker

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/GoodStandingTracker.html

   FD: People will get a warning if they are at risk of losing good
   standing.
   ... Goal is to ensure that people participate.

   JR: Let's see i this achieves its objectives.
   ... Welcome Jason from HP

   JK: Been with HP about a year, was with BitPhone before they got
   acquired. My primary focus is usability.
   ... before that was at Sprint.

   JR: reminder - we are now working in public - so I hope you know
   that this will go down on your permanent record - all technical
   stuff should be in public.
   ... Dom has put everyone on the list.

   PA: Do I get two copies of everything because I am on member and
   public lists?

   DHM: That's specially for you. Will fix it soon...

   Heiko: What should be sent only tothe private list

   JR: There are very few things. If there is some reason to keep
   discussion member-only, or if there is something that is purely
   administrative.

Task Forces

Content Transformation TF

   JR: We haven't done much since Xmas, am working on a draft. Hope we
   will be ready to bring the document to the whole group by the end of
   the month.

   DHM: For schedule, you mean FPWD in February?

   JR: Yes, hope so

   DHM: Is the current editors' draft available?

   JR: Yes

   <dom>
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-draf
   ts/Guidelines/071124

     [18] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/071124

Checker Group

   JR: No Sean today. Group wants to move checker to a Beta status. I
   am unsure what that means. The group needs to think about that. Also
   needs to fulfil Dan's action coordinating what we need to do
   administratively for MobileOK Basic.
   ... Dom has done some real work on analysis of missing test cases.

   Dom: I looked at current code for checker, to see which tests are
   implemented. Sent a message to the mailing list

   <francois> [19]Missing tests cases mail from Dom

     [19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobileok-checker/2008Jan/0019.html

   Dom: identified a couple of tests that are not implemented or not
   correctly implemented, a few bugs, ...
   ... hopefully this will help get the checker in shape for the Beta.
   Will also help dealing with CR exit criteria by having an
   implementation.

mobileOK Pro

   PA: Sent report. Kai is on holiday for a couple of weeks, won't do a
   lot of work. Thinking of having a teleconference before Task Force
   F2F - suggest 24 Jan, 2 hours before this call.

   [chaals will be in Australia at a conference and not able to attend
   the call]

   JR: Everyone can attend, right?

   <PhilA> I suggested that we have a telecon at 13.00 UTC on Thursday
   24/1 ahead of the face to gace meeting on 5 - 6 Feb

   PA: Yes. Date and time will go to the list.

   <PhilA> All welcome to both

Mobile Accessibility

   AC: Not sure when last report was, but not a lot has happened over
   Xmas. WAI EO group have written some introductory stuff.
   ... less technical, I like it.

   <jo> [20]EOWG Page on Mobile

     [20] http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/MWBP-WCAG/accessibility_mobile.html

   AC: Big table that was in the beginning has been taken over by WAI
   EO.

   <dom> [21]Relationship Between Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 and Web
   Content Accessibility Guidelines, Editors draft dated January 4th

     [21] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/ED-mwbp-wcag-20080104/

   AC: I will contribute, others here should do so, but better to work
   on it in WAI EO.

   <jo>
   [22]http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/MWBP-WCAG/accessibility_mobile_b
   arriers.html

     [22] http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/MWBP-WCAG/accessibility_mobile_barriers.html

   AC: This compares effects on users with disabilities and users in
   mobile context.
   ... Otherwise I have been working through the checkpoints.
   ... Think it should go to FPWD this month.

   JR: There are lots of blanks to be done first, no?

   AC: Thought that it was OK to publish noting that the draft is only
   a draft and is incomplete.
   ... waiting for the working groups to give the go-ahead to
   transition it to FPWD.

   Bryan: Do you know date they are asking for comments?

   AC: This month.

   Bryan: Chasing up in ATT, expect to provide input for this review.

   JR: Any idea on timeline?

   Bryan: meeting with them next week.

   JR: This is a joint spec between the two groups - this group still
   has input into when/whether transition happens. I am happy for WAI
   EO to publish, but it is a joint document.
   ... I have reviewed this in sme detail. Pretty good, but think it
   needs more work before it goes public.
   ... Think we want to carefully check the relationships are ones we
   agree on before we publish.

   AC: I am going through the checkpoints in that list

   CMN: I think we can publish as is. I have disagreed with
   classifications, but don't see that we need to plan for three people
   (mostly Alan) to figure it all out before we publish.

   AC: Could add clearer explanation on the draft to clarify the
   situation

   JR: Trying to avoid people giving feedback under misapprehension
   ... would it be useful to have a call for this?

   AC: If people are interested

   [CMN unlikely to join such a call, but will try to make time to give
   more feedback by any such call]

   [CMN I have a hard enough time joining the main calls...]

   <Bryan> 1+

   <dom> [I would do that as well]

   <jo> +1

   [scribe believes the +1 are to providing feedback]

   <jo> [scribe is right]

   <scribe> ACTION: Alan to Coordinate a call with WAI EO, provide
   notice of date and call for feedback as input [recorded in
   [23]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]

   <achuter> ACTION: Alan to plan for a call to review document and
   coordinate with EOWG on it. [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]

   <trackbot-ng> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) -
   Alan

   <trackbot-ng> Try using a different identifier, such as family name
   or username (eg. achuter, atai)

   <achuter> ACTION: achuter to plan for a call to review document and
   coordinate with EOWG on it. [recorded in
   [25]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action03]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-617 - Plan for a call to review
   document and coordinate with EOWG on it. [on Alan Chuter - due
   2008-01-17].

Best Practices 2

   <dom> [26]First Draft of BP 2

     [26] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-bpwg/2008Jan/att-0003/Mobile_Web_Best_Practices_2_0.htm

   Bryan: Sent a draft in email to member list. Looking for feedback...
   ... I am getting administrivia sorted.

   JR: The document looks a bit thin...

   <edm> wonders what would the best process for commenting and
   expanding the current draft - via public mail list?

   <dom> [I think commenting on the public list would be appropriate,
   indeed]

   Bryan: Currently there are just the things we came up with in the
   meeting. Intent is to establish the goal, how it relates to BP1,
   what areas are under consideration, how the subject has changed in
   the last 3 years, etc.

   <dom> [27]Bryan's notes on BP2

     [27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-bpwg/2008Jan/0003.html

   Bryan: Driving thing is exploring capabilities to create great web
   content.
   ... Focus is on what works, but also taking advantage of advanced
   features as available.
   ... Focus should be more than just content developers, should also
   include toolkit developers etc.

   [CMN notes Judy Brewer's advice to focus on Authoring Tools, about 2
   years ago]

   Bryan: Devices have moved on. We had a decision not to try and pick
   an Advanced Delivery Context per se, but to focus on the various
   advanced features available
   ... Accessibility is a goal. We have to focus on how to make things
   great in the mobile context.

   JR: Think the resolution of July is superseded by resolution in
   Boston. We are thinking more specifically about scripting
   capabilities.

   [CMN +1]

   JR: Think we can let the document develop its own
   momentum/direction.

   Bryan: Would be good to have more thoughts about how the resolutions
   we have taken fit together. The list o 17 specific things we came up
   with shows there are specific challenges.
   ... should be thinking about technologies that are going to be
   constrained by the same context, not just "browsers"
   ... we have a brainstormed list from the meeting. Suggest we try to
   think "what does the market need in terms of best practices"

   JR: We should try to be more systematic, and look at existing
   sources of information. Do you have a view as to what the existing
   sources may be?

   Bryan: Ones I know reflect earlier work of this group. Open to
   further pointers.

   JR: BP1 is derivative of various documents (Sprint, Opera, Nokia,
   WCAG, and others)

   Dom: Reviewing the existing materials is very important. We should
   go back to some of the sources to find whether they have evolved or
   had material we didn't take into BP1.
   ... we may also want to look at inviting some people to the group.

   Bryan: Can look at other material and look around. There are a
   number of organisations who have published information, and we can
   bring some to the document.

   <jo> [bryan to take an ACTION to raise ISSUE on sources and
   references and raise awareness on public list that we are looking
   for such source]

   <scribe> ACTION: Bryan to Raise ISSUE on sources and references,
   raise awareness we are looking for same [recorded in
   [28]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action04]

   <edm> wonders if it would make sense to re-examine the old /BP1
   Scope/ doc [29]http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp-scope/] to contrast
   what is different in BP2...

     [29] http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp-scope/

   Bryan: Believe there is a shift from focusing on web content to
   focusing on applications.
   ... similar issues, but more interaction stuff.

   <dom> [that's my understanding as well]

   JR: That's my understanding.

   [CMN sounds like what everyone is saying...]

   <dom> ["mobile web experiences", nice phrase]

   Bryan: BP2 Extends the focus. It is built upon BP1 and follows in
   the same vein. The fundamentals still apply
   ... the rest is just a bullet list, will be a description of the
   problem space etc along teh same organisational lines as BP1. First
   thing to work on is requirements.

   JR: Makes sense to me...

   Ed: wondered if we should look at BP1 Scope document as well as BP
   document to see what is different, what is continued... May help
   structuring the current phase of work.

   Bryan: Sure.

   Ed: I am happy to take an ACTION item...

   <scribe> ACTION: EdM to Review Scope of BP1 to see what it tells us
   about scope of BP2 [recorded in
   [30]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action05]

   <jo> ACTION EdM to Review Scope of BP1 to see what it tells us about
   scope of BP2

   <jo> ACTION: EdM to Review Scope of BP1 to see what it tells us
   about scope of BP2 [recorded in
   [31]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action06]

   <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - EdM

   <dom> ACTION: Ed to Review Scope of BP1 to see what it tells us
   about scope of BP2 [recorded in
   [32]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action07]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-618 - Review Scope of BP1 to see what
   it tells us about scope of BP2 [on Edward Mitukiewicz - due
   2008-01-17].

   <edm> well put

   <dom> ACTION-592?

   <trackbot-ng> ACTION-592 -- Edward Mitukiewicz to report whether he
   can be editor of the document who shall not be named -- due
   2008-01-03 -- OPEN

   <trackbot-ng>
   [33]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/592

     [33] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/592

   JR: Ed, you have a couple of outstanding action items. Are you going
   to co-edit this?

   EdM: Not sure yet.
   ... should know early next week.
   ... think the action I just took includes what I wanted to put in.

   JR: Think there is a placeholder for this already. However it
   emerges, seems good.

Other Business?

   <Zakim> PhilA, you wanted to add a quick AOB

   <PhilA> I will be speaking at
   [34]http://www.iir-events.com/IIR-Conf/Telecoms/EventView.aspx?Event
   ID=1388

     [34] http://www.iir-events.com/IIR-Conf/Telecoms/EventView.aspx?EventID=1388

   PA: I *am* paying attention.
   ... I will be speaking at an event in March in Berlin about
   adaptation, mobileOK, and so forth.
   ... have a plenary session, and a half-day briefing session before.
   Hope Kai will be there too.

   <PhilA> bye

   ADJOURNED

   <edm> bye

   <hgerlach> bye and thanks

   <abel_> bye

   <jo> [thanks CHaals for scribing!]

   <Magnus> bye

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: achuter to plan for a call to review document and
   coordinate with EOWG on it. [recorded in
   [35]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action03]
   [NEW] ACTION: Alan to Coordinate a call with WAI EO, provide notice
   of date and call for feedback as input [recorded in
   [36]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: Alan to plan for a call to review document and
   coordinate with EOWG on it. [recorded in
   [37]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: Bryan to Raise ISSUE on sources and references, raise
   awareness we are looking for same [recorded in
   [38]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action04]
   [NEW] ACTION: Ed to Review Scope of BP1 to see what it tells us
   about scope of BP2 [recorded in
   [39]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action07]
   [NEW] ACTION: EdM to Review Scope of BP1 to see what it tells us
   about scope of BP2 [recorded in
   [40]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action05]
   [NEW] ACTION: EdM to Review Scope of BP1 to see what it tells us
   about scope of BP2 [recorded in
   [41]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/10-bpwg-minutes.html#action06]

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [42]scribe.perl version 1.128
    ([43]CVS log)
    $Date: 2008/01/10 16:19:30 $

     [42] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [43] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 10 January 2008 16:22:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:08:54 UTC