Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference

 

 

DKA: Welcome Alan from AOL!

Jo: Welcome Francois

Francois: Hi everybody
... met some of you in Boston (but had no status back then)
... my background is in mobile-based search, initially in a French start-up, later bought up by Microsoft
... I'll be working with Dom on getting up to speed

DKA: welcome francois !
... Glad to hear Dom will help as well

AlanT: I work at AOL
... I joined the group because the previous rep had left
... I also work on mobile search in AOL
... I met DKA at the mobile ajax workshop back in September
... I'm still trying to get up to speed
... I'm hoping to be able to participate in some of the important issues here

DKA: the work we're trying to inititate is a follow-up on the discussions we had at the mobile ajax workshop
... one of the documents will be the BP 2nd phase doc, which will focus on mobile web applications
... in the meantime, you'll hear a lot about our other task forces on content transformation, mobileOK checker, etc
... (just as a rough idea for this meeting, which may not focus so much on the mobile web applications doc)

<Alan_Tai> hi guys

Report from task forces

DKA: first, the CT task forces

Content Transformation Task Force

Jo: nobody has volunteered to become the lead for this task force
... I won't be able to act as task force lead for much longer
... that said, we have a draft document with lots of editorial comments, but has its basic shape formed
... got contributions from ATT (Bryan) that we need to wove into the text
... the doc needs a bit more review by the task force... we won't have a public FPWD before christmas
... we're looking into asking for possible extensions to HTTP
... have asked Mark Nottingham for feedback on this
... Dom has also suggested we contact Yves Lafon from W3C on this point
... which I haven't done yet
... We need to be careful on what the task force does in this regard
... since we can't recommend more than what HTTP allows

DKA: you're saying we won't have a public document soon
... but the editors drafts are public, right?
... so, what do you think is stopping us from making this an official public draft, on which we can call comments?

Jo: we need to fill up some missing sections, and get consensus in the TF
... various members of the TF are extremely busy at this time

DKA: PLEASE, could you post the DAMN URI of the doc?

<Jo> draft 1b

DKA: I wonder what we can do to have the doc published before the end of the year?

Jo: given the scheduled absences for the upcoming two weeks, it's simply not an option

<scribe> ACTION: Dan to recruit a TF lead for CT [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/06-bpwg-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-608 - Recruit a TF lead for CT [on Daniel Appelquist - due 2007-12-13].

DKA: is the call for the TF pre-emptively canceled next week?

Jo: No

DKA: I suggest it should
... and see what can be done on the second week
... see if we can get it ready before the moratorium
... (even if the editors draft is already public)

<Zakim> dom, you wanted to suggest hearing from AlanT and to suggest a specific action for getting a tf lead

mobileOK checker TF

Sean: not a lot specific to report
... we've received bug reports
... we need to decided when to draw the line for the beta release
... we don't have specific criteria
... hoping to get even more comments on a beta release, and then release a final version sometimes next year

DKA: I have a question on the checker, related to the Korean mobileOK Basic profile
... how much the code is parametrizable for things like page weight?
... so that they could re-use the code for the Korean profile?

Sean: most of this kind of changes seem pretty trivial to make in the current code
... but we could make it even easier (e.g. through configuration)

DKA: obviously, it's not idea they get their own mobileOK version
... but it would be even less ideal that they would get their own library
... it would be much better if they can use the same code

Sean: once their profile is finalized, we can see what needs to be adapted

DKA: when do you think the beta can be released? before the end of the year?

Sean: I guess we can pick the time as we need
... I don't think we're in much hurry
... I think we can play by the ear
... and declare it as beta when we feel like it

<Zakim> dom, you wanted to say this relates to the test suite question for mobileOK Basic

dom: this relates to the test suite we needs for mobileOK CR

<scribe> ACTION: Dom to get the work on the mobileOK test suite started [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/06-bpwg-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-609 - Get the work on the mobileOK test suite started [on Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - due 2007-12-13].

mobileOK Pro TF

DKA: we have an agreed date and location for the work session on mobileOK Pro tests
... early February in London
... room is reserved at Vodafone's offices

<Zakim> Jo, you wanted to mumble about charter, formal leader of the TF timescales etc.

-> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/37584/MobileOK-Pro/results Results of mobileOK Pro survey

-> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/37584/MobileOK-Pro/results#xq3 List of persons interested in editing mobileOK Pro

<Jo> Task Force Rules

Jo: if we want mobileOK Pro to be handled by a TF, we need to set it up as a TF according to our rules (e.g. having a leader, a web space)

DKA: we had a number of people stepping up to help building the spec
... willing to put time on this work item
... but we weren't able to schedule this before the end of year, and so this has been pushed back to February
... my personal idea is that we'll deal with defining the parameters of the TF during that session
... so, given the delay before that meeting, it might be a good idea for the group to discuss this parameters beforehand
... but maybe not today

<Zakim> Jo, you wanted to say that this is going to take longer and needs a longer term commitment

DKA: what about putting on next week's agenda?

Jo: sounds good
... I think Kai is proposing himself as a leader of this TF

DKA: right, but that predates the notion of TF itself

Jo: we should check if he's interested in being the leader of this TF
... and if he is, action-ing him to write a charter for the TF

<scribe> ACTION: Dan to check with Kai if he's interested in leading the mobileOK pro TF and asking him to prepare a TF charter if so [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/06-bpwg-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-610 - Check with Kai if he's interested in leading the mobileOK pro TF and asking him to prepare a TF charter if so [on Daniel Appelquist - due 2007-12-13].

Accessibility document

DKA: (about the accessibility doc) does it make sense to go through the document without Alan on the call?

Jo: Alan won't be on the call next week either
... members of the group are supposed to have read the document by now
... I think the group should give Alan feedback asap
... the group hasn't reviewed the document at all yet

DKA: we did at the F2F

Jo: I'd rather not have to lead the discussion on the accessibility document because my voice will not hold out

http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/lates

-> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/latest Accessbility doc editors's draft

DKA: my understanding is that the document is organized from a perspective of content authors who are interested both in accessibility and mobile web best practices
... it describes what needs to be done if you've followed the BP and want to make your content accessible
... from what I understand, the document is intended to be informational rather than normative

Dom: that's also my understanding

DKA: section 2 describes the high-level view of the commonalities between accessibility and mobility
... section 3 on how people with disabilities use the mobile web, but it is still empty
... does anybody knows whether this is going to be filled up?
... that may not be a showstopper, but would be good to know Alan's plans for this section
... Section 4 explains in details how each BP can help accessibility-wise
... and relates it to the level of WCAG 1.0 compliance as relevant
... the document also means to cover wcag 2.0, but is currently still sketchy
... I don't have enough background on WCAG 2.0 to make a judgment call on whether this matched what WCAG 2.0 or not
... I think it's really up to Alan to sync with Shawn Henry and the WAI EO WG on this
... the document finishes on how to use both WCAG and BP to achieve Web nirvana
... there is still lots of missing stuff, but already plenty good stuff too
... since the doc is now part of the WG-as-a-whole, I think we need to split up the work among WG participants to complete the missing parts
... although it seems to be a prerequisite to be knowledgeable on WCAG 1.0 and 2.0 to be able to work on this
... either by being already familiar with it, or doing extended research on it
... except for Alan and Charles, I don't think many of us are very familiar with them unfortunately
... Any suggestions as to how we can speed up the process in these conditions?

Jo: I don't really know how we can avoid that problem really

DKA: could we involve the community on this?

Dom: the best way to get community involvement is to release the doc as FPWD, I would say

DKA: I agree
... we probably need to get agreement from the EO WG though
... should I check with Alan and Shawn on whether they're ok with it?

<Zakim> Jo, you wanted to note that a similar amount of work is needed on the ProTests - so caveat Pro Task Force

Dom: sounds good; make it clear we're very much aware this isn't anywhere ready, but we're trying to get more visibility on that work

Jo: the amount of work needed is huge

<scribe> ACTION: Dan to check with Shawn and Alan on getting current editors draft of accessibility document as FPWD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/06-bpwg-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-611 - Check with Shawn and Alan on getting current editors draft of accessibility document as FPWD [on Daniel Appelquist - due 2007-12-13].

<Jo> [and a similar amount is needed on the Pro Tests, so the Pro Task force needs to be aware of that]

DKA: we could go through issues and actions, or end the call early

Action and issue review

DKA: ok, let's end early, and leave it to group members to update their actions before next week

[adjourned]