- From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:03:53 +0200
- To: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group WG <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Hi all,
The minutes of today's call are available at:
http://www.w3.org/2009/08/11-bpwg-minutes.html
... and copied as text below.
Resolutions taken during the call:
- re-publish the mobileOK Scheme Note with the correct
"application/powder+xml" media type for POWDER.
- on CT: Use a separate ICS document that contains all MUST-level and
SHOULD-level statements
Cleanup meeting otherwise: many actions were reviewed and closed.
Group action: review and discuss Adam's latest text proposal on handling
device variation and CSS MQ
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Aug/0005.html
(warning on media types still to be added)
Thanks,
Francois.
-----
11 Aug 2009
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Aug/0004.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2009/08/11-bpwg-irc
Attendees
Present
tomhume, francois, brucel, adam, kai, EdC, SeanP
Regrets
jo, dka, alanc, yeliz, abel, miguel, manrique, nacho
Chair
francois
Scribe
EdC
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]mobileOK Scheme: incorrect media type
2. [6]CT Guidelines - X-Device-* registration
3. [7]CT Guidelines - Tests on same origin policy
4. [8]CT Guidelines - mailing-list for conformance statements
5. [9]CT Guidelines - Implementation Conformance Statement
6. [10]CT Guidelines - issues and actions
7. [11]Addendum to BP (BP1.5) - Status update
8. [12]MWABP - Status update
9. [13]MWABP - CSS Media Queries
10. [14]MWABP - ISSUE-293 on pixel density
11. [15]MWABP - Other actions
12. [16]Actions and issues
* [17]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
mobileOK Scheme: incorrect media type
MobileOK scheme: formal correction to media type in the document
necessary.
The correction could be published in a list of errata but would best
not be hidden. Suggestion: re-publish the note with the correction.
<francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: re-publish the mobileOK Scheme Note
with the correct "application/powder+xml" media type for POWDER.
Deemed important because of impact on the validator.
+1
<francois> +1
RESOLUTION: re-publish the mobileOK Scheme Note with the correct
"application/powder+xml" media type for POWDER.
CT Guidelines - X-Device-* registration
<francois> ACTION-928?
<trackbot> ACTION-928 -- Francois Daoust to progress registration of
the X- headers irrespective his personal distate for the subject --
due 2009-04-02 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[18]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/928
[18] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/928
Registration of X-Device-* header fields: a few replied in the IETF
mailing list. Suggestion: register the header fields without X-
prefix.
Francois lets one more week pass on the IETF mailing list before
registration takes place.
<francois> [19]latest discussion on the IETF mailing-list
[19]
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-message-headers/current/msg00101.html
CT Guidelines - Tests on same origin policy
<francois> ACTION-969?
<trackbot> ACTION-969 -- Charles McCathieNevile to forward tests for
Xss and cookie handling to group -- due 2009-06-23 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[20]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/969
[20] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/969
Tests have not been reviewed so far. Somebody should be given a task
to do this.
Is the question whether the tests cover what we want to check ?
Main problem (Francois, Eduardo): seem ok, but do they cover the
issues of same-origin policy? Security specialists think this is not
so simple an aspect to test at run-time.
Suggestion: deeper review of the test suite.
<francois> ACTION: daoust to review tests provided by Charles on
same origin policy [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/11-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1001 - Review tests provided by Charles on
same origin policy [on François Daoust - due 2009-08-18].
CT Guidelines - mailing-list for conformance statements
<francois> ACTION-991?
<trackbot> ACTION-991 -- François Daoust to check legality of
mailing list name and maek the new list -- due 2009-07-07 --
PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[22]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/991
[22] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/991
<francois> [23]mailing-list announcement
[23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jul/0018.html
<francois> public-content-transformation-conformance@w3.org
Mailing list to publish and comment on ICS for transformation
proxies.
<francois> close ACTION-991
<trackbot> ACTION-991 Check legality of mailing list name and maek
the new list closed
CT Guidelines - Implementation Conformance Statement
<francois> [24]updated ICS announcement
[24] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0137.html
ICS have not been formally reviewed yet. An update has been prepared
by Francois.
Two variants: one version with all statements, and one excluding the
MUST/MUST NOT statements. First impressions are that the former
version is preferable. Suggestion: decide to use the complete ICS
variant.
<francois> [25]complete version
[25]
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/ics-090622-must
<francois> [26]should-only version
[26]
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/ics-090622
EdC: I am in favour of the complete version.
<francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Use a complete ICS that contains
both MUST/MUST NOT and SHOULD/SHOULD NOT statements
And I favour keeping it as a separate document from the CTG itself !
<SeanP> I like the full version.
<tomhume> +1
<SeanP> Agree that it should be a separate document.
<francois> +1
Initial idea of excluding MUST was that they have to be respected
anyway (so are somewhat redundant when assessing the conformance of
an implementation).
+1
<SeanP> +1
<francois> EdC: keep that as a separate document or integrate it
with main document?
<francois> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Use a separate ICS document that
contains all MUST-level and SHOULD-level statements
<francois> +1
+1
<SeanP> +1
RESOLUTION: Use a separate ICS document that contains all MUST-level
and SHOULD-level statements
Regarding content: satisfactory so far. No further formatting
needed.
<SeanP> Looks good to me.
<francois> close ACTION-892
<trackbot> ACTION-892 Prepare an ICS with MUST/MUST NOT (to view if
that's a good idea), try to add a "depends on" column, explain "Not
applicable" or remove it. closed
CT Guidelines - issues and actions
<francois> [27]jo's email
[27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0102.html
<francois> [28]latest CT draft
[28]
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/090622
<francois> ACTION-971?
<trackbot> ACTION-971 -- Jo Rabin to adopt text proposed by EdC and
Amended by Jo for the Abstract -- due 2009-06-22 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[29]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/971
[29] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/971
Many actions pending review.
<francois> close ACTION-971
<trackbot> ACTION-971 Adopt text proposed by EdC and Amended by Jo
for the Abstract closed
<francois> ACTION-972?
<trackbot> ACTION-972 -- Jo Rabin to add NOT RECOMMENDED to the
rfc2119 section of the document -- due 2009-06-22 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[30]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/972
[30] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/972
<francois> close ACTION-972
<trackbot> ACTION-972 add NOT RECOMMENDED to the rfc2119 section of
the document closed
<francois> ACTION-973?
<trackbot> ACTION-973 -- Jo Rabin to add Accept-Language ot the
other than list in 4.1.5 -- due 2009-06-23 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[31]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/973
[31] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/973
<francois> close ACTION-973
<trackbot> ACTION-973 Add Accept-Language ot the other than list in
4.1.5 closed
<francois> ACTION-974?
<trackbot> ACTION-974 -- Jo Rabin to enact the resolution of 28th
April ref x-device cf
[32]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0044.htm
l -- due 2009-06-23 -- PENDINGREVIEW
[32] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0044.html
<trackbot>
[33]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/974
[33] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/974
<francois> close ACTION-974
<trackbot> ACTION-974 Enact the resolution of 28th April ref
x-device cf
[34]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0044.htm
l closed
[34] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0044.html
<francois> ACTION-975?
<trackbot> ACTION-975 -- Jo Rabin to correct SeanP's point 2 -- due
2009-06-23 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[35]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/975
[35] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/975
I believe it was just to refer to RFC, and avoid inserting
production rules for the X-Device-fields.
<francois> [36]Sean's comments on previous email
[36] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0050.html
Sean to review Action 975.
<francois> ACTION: sean to review Jo's updates in draft 1s based on
his feedback. When done, actions 975, 976, 977, 978, 979 can be
closed [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/11-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1002 - Review Jo's updates in draft 1s
based on his feedback. When done, actions 975, 976, 977, 978, 979
can be closed [on Sean Patterson - due 2009-08-18].
<francois> ACTION-980?
<trackbot> ACTION-980 -- Jo Rabin to remove editorial note at 4.2.9
ref mobileOK and add a reference to mobileOK scheme to show how it
is done -- due 2009-06-23 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[38]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/980
[38] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/980
<francois> close ACTION-980
<trackbot> ACTION-980 Remove editorial note at 4.2.9 ref mobileOK
and add a reference to mobileOK scheme to show how it is done closed
<francois> ACTION-985?
<trackbot> ACTION-985 -- Eduardo Casais to assess whether there is
any relevant terminology we can quote in respect of last para of
Section 5 - cf ACTION-933 -- due 2009-06-23 -- CLOSED
<trackbot>
[39]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/985
[39] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/985
Addendum to BP (BP1.5) - Status update
Any news from Kai on BP: none. Work still outstanding. Kai was
absent (vacations) and must catch up with the status of the edition
of the document.
<francois> [40]Old actions
[40] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/products/9
<francois> ACTION-797?
<trackbot> ACTION-797 -- Jeffrey Sonstein to check on availability
of data about the number of acceptable links in a focus-based
browser -- due 2008-09-25 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[41]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/797
[41] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/797
Action 797 still open, old action. Discussion has been interrupted
for a long time.
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 797
<francois> close ACTION-797
<trackbot> ACTION-797 Check on availability of data about the number
of acceptable links in a focus-based browser closed
<francois> ACTION-837?
<trackbot> ACTION-837 -- Kai Scheppe to provide explanatory text for
the addendum which will put the document (mobileOK Pro Tests 1) in
the correct context and explain to the audience that it is intended
to aid content authors in creating still better content. -- due
2008-09-11 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[42]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/837
[42] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/837
<francois> close ACTION-837
<trackbot> ACTION-837 Provide explanatory text for the addendum
which will put the document (mobileOK Pro Tests 1) in the correct
context and explain to the audience that it is intended to aid
content authors in creating still better content. closed
The pending actions can be closed, they have been taken care of and
integrated in the document.
<francois> ACTION-847?
<trackbot> ACTION-847 -- Kai Scheppe to change the Addendum
according to the resolution about toning down the test character of
the document -- due 2008-09-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[43]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/847
[43] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/847
<francois> close ACTION-847
<trackbot> ACTION-847 Change the Addendum according to the
resolution about toning down the test character of the document
closed
<francois> ACTION-848?
<trackbot> ACTION-848 -- Kai Scheppe to sprinkle in delivery context
information (DDC and others) where appropriate -- due 2008-09-24 --
PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[44]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/848
[44] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/848
<francois> close ACTION-848
<trackbot> ACTION-848 Sprinkle in delivery context information (DDC
and others) where appropriate closed
MWABP - Status update
Adam has posted a couple of messages on the mailing list regarding
MWABP.
I.e. new text for handling recognition of device capabilities.
Important change to be reviewed.
Apart from other less major revisions, the pending point is a
discussion on Canvas/SVG.
<brucel> is there a direct link to the CSSMQ and Canvas/ SVG
changes?
A detailed answer to Jonathan's suggestion has been made. J's
proposals have been included in some form or another in the
document, so no further work should be needed there.
Afterwards, the document could be published.
CSS-MQ and Canvas/SVG are two separate issues.
MWABP - CSS Media Queries
Adam thinks it is not necessary to expand the text much. Some more
context about CSS-MQ should be provided, but the technology is
fairly clear.
<francois> [45]latest text for handling variations and CSS MQ
[45] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Aug/0005.html
EdC: hadn't we in a previous meeting decided that they should be
some kind of warnings on CSS media types?
adam: there's a sentence that they should not be fully relied upon.
EdC: that's two different things. There's media queries and media
types, and media types are sometimes suprisingly handled by mobile
devices
<brucel> media types as in "handheld"?
adam: ok, understood.
People should review the proposed text and make comments on the
mailing list.
<francois> ACTION-997?
<trackbot> ACTION-997 -- Adam Connors to write first text based on
the listserve discussion of Media Queries -- due 2009-07-21 --
PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[46]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/997
[46] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/997
MWABP - ISSUE-293 on pixel density
An issue becoming more acute in the mobile environment: pixel
density.
<francois> [47]EdC's email on pixel density
[47] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Aug/0000.html
<francois> EdC: I would have difficulty to propose any kind of BP.
It's becoming more and more acute. It's something to keep an eye.
Existing BP are weak on this topic. BP 1 deals with absolute
measures vs. relative, font dimensions, not really informational
content.
The topic is becoming important, but there are no best practices we
can identify at this stage. The group stands by its previous
resolution.
MWABP - Other actions
<francois> ACTION-845?
<trackbot> ACTION-845 -- Kai Scheppe to finalize information on
caching concept, now live, and contribute it to the list. -- due
2008-09-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[48]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/845
[48] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/845
The question is: has the information in the BP related to caching
been completed? The text contains now recommendations about caching;
are they enough?
<francois> [49]Kai's email on caching
[49] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2008Sep/0052.html
<francois> close ACTION-845
<trackbot> ACTION-845 Finalize information on caching concept, now
live, and contribute it to the list. closed
According to Kai: this was supposed to be reviewed by a colleague of
Dan (but wasn't done). Some fairly detailed caching behaviour has
been discussed.
<francois> ACTION-995?
<trackbot> ACTION-995 -- Adam Connors to look through J.J.'s email
and apply additional text as necessary to reflect the additional
desireable goals as a note after each individual BP. -- due
2009-07-14 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[50]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/995
[50] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/995
We give some more time to Jonathan so that he can consider the
detailed response of Adam to his proposals.
<francois> ACTION-999?
<trackbot> ACTION-999 -- Daniel Appelquist to feedback on action-845
-- due 2009-07-21 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[51]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/999
[51] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/999
<francois> close ACTION-999
<trackbot> ACTION-999 Feedback on action-845 closed
MWABP: almost there: CSS-MQ to be reviewed. Main issue: Canvas/SVG
(a proposal is to be sent by Jeff). Afterwards, the document is
ready to be published.
Actions and issues
<francois> [52]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/products
[52] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/products
<francois> ACTION-970?
<trackbot> ACTION-970 -- Phil Archer to ask Rigo to consider Jo's
comments and revise mobileOK license accordingly -- due 2009-06-09
-- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[53]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/970
[53] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/970
<francois> close ACTION-970
<trackbot> ACTION-970 ask Rigo to consider Jo's comments and revise
mobileOK license accordingly closed
<francois> ACTION-838?
<trackbot> ACTION-838 -- Bryan Sullivan to summarise points to take
back to the WebApps group -- due 2008-09-10 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[54]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/838
[54] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/838
Old action still open.
<francois> close ACTION-838
<trackbot> ACTION-838 Summarise points to take back to the WebApps
group closed
<francois> ACTION-875?
<trackbot> ACTION-875 -- Jeffrey Sonstein to scope current draft and
see what aspects may be of interest to us. -- due 2008-10-27 --
PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[55]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/875
[55] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/875
<francois> close ACTION-875
<trackbot> ACTION-875 Scope current draft and see what aspects may
be of interest to us. closed
Reply to be sent, but missed the deadline.
<francois> [56]actions pending review
[56] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/pendingreview
<francois> ACTION-903?
<trackbot> ACTION-903 -- François Daoust to setup a registration
poll for next F2F in London -- due 2009-02-03 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[57]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/903
[57] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/903
<francois> close ACTION-903
<trackbot> ACTION-903 Setup a registration poll for next F2F in
London closed
<francois> ACTION-917?
<trackbot> ACTION-917 -- François Daoust to extend the TPAC Noc
Questionnaire and add a question to assess whether the meeting would
be better attended if it was held somewhere else -- due 2009-03-24
-- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[58]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/917
[58] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/917
<francois> close ACTION-917
<trackbot> ACTION-917 Extend the TPAC Noc Questionnaire and add a
question to assess whether the meeting would be better attended if
it was held somewhere else closed
TPAC = Technical Plenary Advisory Committee (November in
California). Decision pending: whether the group attends or not.
<francois> ACTION-968?
<trackbot> ACTION-968 -- Jo Rabin to add NOT RECOMMENDED to the
rfc2119 section of the document -- due 2009-06-16 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[59]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/968
[59] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/968
<francois> close ACTION-968
<trackbot> ACTION-968 Add NOT RECOMMENDED to the rfc2119 section of
the document closed
Any other business?
bye
<brucel> bye all
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: daoust to review tests provided by Charles on same
origin policy [recorded in
[60]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/11-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]
[DONE] ACTION: sean to review Jo's updates in draft 1s based on his
feedback. When done, actions 975, 976, 977, 978, 979 can be
[recorded in
[61]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/11-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 11 August 2009 15:04:29 UTC