RE: Content Transformation Guidelines 1v

Some comments on 1v:

--In 4.1.5.4, in the first paragraph it is stated that "proxies should
make the request for such resources with the same User-Agent header
field...".  Other altered header fields should be included as well
(e.g., Accept).

--In the second note in 4.1.5.5, the first sentence says "this is a
already existing convention...".  The word "a" should be "an".

--I think the first sentence in 4.2.2 would be clearer if it read as
follows: "Proxies must provide a means for users to express preferences
for inhibiting content transformation even when *content transformation*
has been chosen by the user as the default behavior."  (The word "this"
was replaced.)  I had to read this a couple of times to figure out the
meaning.

--In 4.2.9.1, item 2, we are saying that "altered content should
validate according to an appropriate published formal grammar".
However, much of the unaltered content on the web doesn't validate.  I
don't think we can expect CT proxies to fix all of that content.  (For
example, the W3C HTML validation site finds 44 errors with the Google
home page.)

--In 4.2.9.2, the first sentence in the note ("In this document two URIs
have the Same-Origin...") has two periods at the end.

--In section I, the first sentence has the clause "but because the
client software communicates with using proprietary protocols and
techniques".  The word "with" can be omitted.


Sean

-----Original Message-----
From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Jo Rabin
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 4:04 AM
To: Public BPWG
Subject: Content Transformation Guidelines 1v

In what can only be described as a shining example of the Entente 
Cordiale in action, I am delighted to announce that Anglo French 
collaboration has resulted in a new version of the CT Guidelines [1], 
closely linked to its accompanying ICS [2].

Jo

[1] 
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guide
lines/090924 


[2] 
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guide
lines/ics-090923

Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 13:29:19 UTC