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

MWABP - a few comments (mostly editorial)

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:23:11 +0100
Message-ID: <49301AEF.402@w3.org>
To: MWI BPWG Public <public-bpwg@w3.org>, Adam Connors <adamconnors@google.com>

Hi Adam,

A few comments on the draft.

A couple of comments
3.4.15 Use a Cookieless Domain for Static Content
  I am wondering: cannot this be achieved with paths as well, 
restricting the validity of cookies depending on the path of the resources?

3.5.8 Separate Rarely Used Functionality:
  Do we really want to recommend the use of an "embedded frame"? Does it 
work on many mobile devices?

Overall editorial comment
References and cross-references are either missing, incorrect, or do not 
follow the "usual" pattern, e.g.:
  1.4: "amplify on the recommendations of the Mobile Web Best Practices 
  1.4.2: "Web Widgets [REF]"
  1.5: "[DIP]" targets the Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 specification. no link around "3.5.10 Ensure Consistency Between Desktop and 
Mobile" direct link to the Offline Webapps specification
... and "how to do it" sections sometimes reference techniques or other 
specs where a link would be much useful.

Typos and editorial comments by section
(end up with "?" when I'm unsure whether I'm right)
1.5.1: "Ubiquitous Web A*a*pplications" -> "Ubiquitous Web Applications" ECMAScript Variables:
   the notion of "pageload" and "across views" may be difficult to grasp. Cookies:
   the paragraph does not say that cookies may not be supported or may 
be turned off. It's only mentioned between parentheses in the following 
paragraph on Personalized URL. Start with "When supported and active"? Personalized URL: "After first redirect the user [...] to 
identify them[...]". -> "After first redirect *users* [...] to identify 
them[...]" The use of bold around "should not" in a Rec to be makes it look 
normative. Normative statements are already misunderstood by everyone, 
we should probably not insist with fake ones ;-) "intial" -> "initial" "signifcant" -> "significant" "it will not execute" -> actually it will, but will loop on the 
first statement. "the sensitive content of the datafeed will not execute"? "same-origin security model" -> "same-origin policy"? "Safe EVAL" -> any reference to a definition or ways to do that?

3.3.3 The (already long) title only talks about personal information 
whereas the BP also talks about device information. "Consider the following issues" -> "Consider the following 
possibilities" ? "fewer, large requests" -> "fewer, larger requests" "using css positioning and clipping" -> "use CSS positioning and 
clipping" (and ref) As mentioned during the call, I do not see why "User Agent 
Profile" is specifically mentioned here in the sense that DDR or any 
other means that make the server aware of the device capabilities would 
also fit the bill. "On demain" -> "On demand" "intial" -> "initial"

Received on Friday, 28 November 2008 16:23:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:52 UTC