IRC log of bpwg on 2008-02-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:55:54 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #bpwg
14:55:54 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-bpwg-irc
14:55:56 [trackbot-ng]
RRSAgent, make logs public
14:55:56 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #bpwg
14:55:58 [trackbot-ng]
Zakim, this will be BPWG
14:55:58 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot-ng; I see MWI_BPWG(BCTF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 5 minutes
14:55:59 [trackbot-ng]
Meeting: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference
14:55:59 [trackbot-ng]
Date: 26 February 2008
14:56:32 [francois]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Feb/0058.html
14:56:42 [francois]
Chair: francois
14:57:13 [francois]
Regrets: rob
14:57:25 [francois]
zakim, code?
14:57:25 [Zakim]
the conference code is 2283 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), francois
14:57:50 [Zakim]
MWI_BPWG(BCTF)10:00AM has now started
14:57:57 [Zakim]
+francois
14:58:20 [Zakim]
+ +1.519.880.aaaa
14:58:43 [francois]
zakim, aaaa is kemp
14:58:44 [Zakim]
+kemp; got it
15:00:44 [Magnus]
Magnus has joined #bpwg
15:00:57 [abel]
abel has joined #bpwg
15:01:04 [Magnus]
zakim, code?
15:01:04 [Zakim]
the conference code is 2283 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Magnus
15:01:04 [abel]
abel has left #bpwg
15:01:24 [Zakim]
+Magnus
15:01:34 [jo]
jo has joined #bpwg
15:01:48 [hgerlach]
hgerlach has joined #bpwg
15:03:51 [Zakim]
+hgerlach
15:04:58 [hgerlach]
Minutes are not working http://www.w3.org/Search/Mail/Public/search?keywords=&hdr-1-name=subject&hdr-1-query=%5Bminutes%5D&index-grp=Public__FULL&index-type=t&type-index=public-bpwg-ct
15:05:43 [francois]
http://www.w3.org/2008/02/19-bpwg-minutes.html
15:05:56 [jo]
zakim, code?
15:05:56 [Zakim]
the conference code is 2283 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), jo
15:06:36 [Zakim]
+jo
15:07:39 [francois]
ScribeNick: Magnus
15:07:46 [francois]
Topic: New draft available
15:08:03 [francois]
-> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/Guidelines/080226 Content Transformation Guidelines 1e
15:08:03 [francois]
close ACTION-661
15:08:04 [trackbot-ng]
ACTION-661 Redraft CT Guidleines based on conversation on this call closed
15:08:43 [Magnus]
francois: proposal is to go through this draft and take resolutions as to what in practice our guidelines say from a tech point of view
15:08:53 [Magnus]
... all the arguments have been discussed on the email list
15:08:59 [francois]
Topic: Switch to summer time for next calls
15:09:02 [Magnus]
... it's time to take decisions
15:09:24 [Magnus]
... switch to DST doesn't match between Europe and US
15:09:40 [Magnus]
... proposal is to stick to UTC European time
15:10:09 [jo]
+1
15:10:11 [Magnus]
... this will be for 3 weeks
15:10:17 [Magnus]
+1
15:10:30 [Magnus]
... hereby agreed
15:10:47 [jo]
RESOLUTION: Stick to Euro time when US moves clocks forward in March
15:10:54 [Magnus]
Topic: New Draft of guidelines
15:11:20 [jo]
q+
15:11:20 [Magnus]
francois: let's start with the objectives part section 2.4
15:11:53 [Magnus]
... does everybody agree that we should not mention active/passive states since it's confusing?
15:11:57 [jo]
+1
15:12:00 [Magnus]
+1
15:12:01 [francois]
PROPOSED RESOLUTION: remove 2.4 Proxy States part
15:12:18 [francois]
RESOLUTION: remove 2.4 Proxy States part
15:12:19 [jo]
q?
15:12:25 [francois]
ack jo
15:12:36 [Magnus]
Jo: Just want to mention in section 2.4
15:12:45 [Magnus]
... the requirements expressed there are not accurate any more
15:13:00 [Magnus]
... desired media types is not a requirement for what the UA tells the proxy
15:13:14 [Magnus]
francois: are you talking about 2.1?
15:13:24 [Magnus]
... agree that they are not up to date
15:13:25 [jo]
s/2.4/2.1
15:13:36 [Magnus]
... they are beyond the scope of the doc. Let's leave it for now.
15:13:40 [Magnus]
jo: fine.
15:14:00 [Magnus]
francois: next thing will be about 2.6 control of the behavior of the proxy
15:14:08 [Magnus]
... there is an editorial note here
15:14:12 [SeanP]
SeanP has joined #bpwg
15:14:27 [Magnus]
... are we talkign of a list of mandatory options?
15:14:40 [Magnus]
... that the ct proxy should allow user to change?
15:14:44 [Magnus]
jo: it needs revising
15:14:53 [francois]
zakim, mute magnus
15:14:53 [Zakim]
Magnus should now be muted
15:15:08 [Magnus]
... are we saying that a ct proxy must offer control to the user
15:15:30 [Magnus]
francois: it's about listing the option. Should we specify a list of mandatory options?
15:15:32 [Zakim]
+SeanP
15:15:41 [kemp]
q+
15:15:46 [francois]
ack kemp
15:15:46 [Magnus]
... Do others have opinions?
15:15:58 [Magnus]
Aron: some recommendation would be good
15:16:08 [Magnus]
... for us we will probably have user controls
15:16:18 [Magnus]
... it's dangerous territory to make it mandatory
15:16:22 [Magnus]
... but it's a good idea
15:16:30 [Magnus]
francois: you would like a list of suggestions?
15:16:39 [jo]
q+
15:16:40 [Magnus]
Aron: yes. should is ok - must is inappropriate
15:16:46 [Zakim]
+AndrewS
15:16:50 [francois]
ack jo
15:16:50 [kemp]
s/Aron/Aaron/
15:16:58 [Magnus]
Jo: I'm happy with that
15:17:09 [Magnus]
... could Aaron draft that for us?
15:17:13 [Magnus]
Aaron: ok
15:17:25 [Magnus]
Jo: we want this done before Seoul
15:18:02 [Magnus]
Francois: I suppose you have the points in the previous draft?
15:18:13 [Magnus]
... I have listed them in one of my threads
15:18:15 [andrews]
andrews has joined #bpwg
15:18:16 [jo]
ACTION: Kemp to draft section 2.6 listing user control options that SHOULD be supported
15:18:16 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-666 - Draft section 2.6 listing user control options that SHOULD be supported [on Aaron Kemp - due 2008-03-04].
15:18:17 [Magnus]
Aaron: I'll take a look
15:19:22 [kemp]
q+
15:19:22 [Magnus]
Francois: Maybe prefs are listed somewhere else
15:19:34 [Magnus]
... is this within scope?
15:19:42 [francois]
ack kemp
15:19:46 [Magnus]
Aaron: Just wondering if this should be merged into 2.6
15:19:48 [jo]
q+
15:19:53 [Magnus]
... why is this different?
15:20:00 [Magnus]
Francois: agreed
15:20:05 [francois]
ack jo
15:20:08 [Magnus]
Jo: I noticed that as well
15:20:18 [Magnus]
... 2.7 and 2.8 should both be subsections of 2.6
15:20:31 [jo]
ACTION: Jo to make 2.7 and 2.8 sub sections of 2.6
15:20:31 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-667 - Make 2.7 and 2.8 sub sections of 2.6 [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-03-04].
15:20:48 [Magnus]
... I am increasingly thinking that since POWDER is coming out soon
15:20:57 [Magnus]
... we should encourage ppl to llok for mobileOK labels
15:21:17 [kemp]
s/llok/look/
15:21:19 [Magnus]
... something that various portions of the site - transform this, don't transfor that
15:22:11 [kemp]
q+
15:22:21 [kemp]
q-
15:22:30 [Magnus]
i just got lost in that very very long sentence
15:22:55 [Magnus]
Francois: don't know when POWDER will be out
15:23:00 [jo]
ACTION: JO to raise an ISSUE on labelling using POWDER describing transformation options on sites
15:23:00 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-668 - Raise an ISSUE on labelling using POWDER describing transformation options on sites [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-03-04].
15:23:24 [Magnus]
... POWDER will be able to replace robots.txt
15:23:29 [Magnus]
jo: Exactly
15:23:52 [Magnus]
... there is an issue that POWDER is not allowed to have a well known location to retrieve it
15:23:56 [Magnus]
.. but we can get around that
15:24:01 [Magnus]
s/../.../
15:24:09 [SeanP]
The POWDER idea is interesting. I'll need to read up on POWDER...
15:24:20 [Magnus]
Heiko: that's why I suggested response header
15:24:34 [Magnus]
francois: let's move on
15:24:49 [Magnus]
... part 3.1
15:24:49 [francois]
Topic: Client origination of request (§3.1)
15:24:55 [Magnus]
... client origination of requests
15:25:09 [Magnus]
... the list of options can go there?
15:25:24 [Magnus]
... do we have anything to add to this part? It's rather small now
15:25:56 [Magnus]
Jo: we don't want to talk about the client
15:26:23 [Magnus]
Francois: move on to 3.2
15:26:25 [francois]
Topic: Proxy Receipt, Forwarding or Response to a Request (§3.2)
15:26:35 [Magnus]
... so this is a bigger part
15:26:43 [jo]
ACTION: Jo to remove sect 3.1 and transfer semantics to the present 3.3
15:26:43 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-669 - Remove sect 3.1 and transfer semantics to the present 3.3 [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-03-04].
15:26:52 [Magnus]
... I suggest we leave the detection of the cases when the UA is not a browser an open issue
15:26:53 [jo]
s/3.3/3.2
15:27:10 [Magnus]
... I have a small question about the 2nd paragraph
15:27:11 [jo]
ACTION: Jo to remove sect 3.1 and transfer semantics to the present 3.2
15:27:11 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-670 - Remove sect 3.1 and transfer semantics to the present 3.2 [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-03-04].
15:27:16 [Magnus]
.. what is the point of the paragraph?
15:27:20 [jo]
close ACTION-669
15:27:20 [trackbot-ng]
ACTION-669 Remove sect 3.1 and transfer semantics to the present 3.3 closed
15:27:32 [Magnus]
s/../.../
15:28:25 [Magnus]
Jo: I think the point is that it should not respond with a cached transformed copy
15:28:34 [Magnus]
... that is not brilliantly clear
15:28:58 [jo]
ACTION: Jo to update wording of sect 3.2 p 2 to clarify that the intent is not to respond with a transformed copy
15:28:58 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-671 - Update wording of sect 3.2 p 2 to clarify that the intent is not to respond with a transformed copy [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-03-04].
15:29:11 [Magnus]
Francois: we are getting to the core part of our discussion
15:29:24 [Magnus]
... should the CT proxy advertise that it is there and its capabilities
15:29:35 [Magnus]
... and thirdly how - in which format
15:29:48 [Magnus]
... in my agenda I have listed possibilities
15:30:06 [Magnus]
... I removed all possibilities that are not based on existing technologies in practice
15:30:17 [Magnus]
... there are only via or pragma header left
15:30:33 [Magnus]
... or third ct proxy should not advertise
15:30:47 [Magnus]
... my proposal is to use the VIA header to advertise that the CT proxy is on the line
15:30:57 [Magnus]
... it's already in the draft
15:31:29 [Magnus]
... my second proposal is that we use the common section of the VIA header with the caveat that anybody else may strip them away
15:31:40 [francois]
Q?
15:31:43 [kemp]
q+
15:31:44 [jo]
s/common/comment/
15:31:53 [francois]
ack kemp
15:32:03 [Magnus]
Aaron: do we wan t to how we are going to talk about capabilities?
15:32:27 [Magnus]
Francois: 1 musd question
15:32:32 [SeanP]
I'm OK with using the Via header.
15:32:36 [Magnus]
... it has to be an extensible format
15:32:51 [Magnus]
... all content providers must be able to parse the string automatically
15:32:54 [kemp]
q+
15:32:58 [francois]
ack kemp
15:33:00 [Magnus]
... otherwise it's only for humans and useless
15:33:19 [Magnus]
Aaron: is there enough that CTs, so I propose a URI poiting to a description
15:33:24 [jo]
q+ to speak in favor of Aaron's proposal
15:33:40 [kemp]
q+
15:33:45 [jo]
q+ to add that this could be a pointer to a POWDER
15:33:50 [Magnus]
Francois: what are the things taht a CT proxy can do that can't be rephrased into simple verbs (reformat, restructure, etc)
15:34:17 [Magnus]
Aaron: basically my point is that it can be too generic and not useful
15:34:20 [francois]
ack kemp
15:34:22 [francois]
ack jo
15:34:22 [Zakim]
jo, you wanted to speak in favor of Aaron's proposal and to add that this could be a pointer to a POWDER
15:34:50 [Magnus]
Jo: I'm not Phil Archer's rep in this respect, but it makes sense to use POWDER
15:35:02 [Magnus]
... it would at least be consistent
15:35:13 [Magnus]
... with other things we are trying to do in this group
15:35:23 [Magnus]
... a URI in the comments fields is not inventing new technology
15:35:31 [Magnus]
... it's obvious what it means
15:35:45 [Magnus]
... this would be a great help to content providers with a rich enough vocabulary
15:35:56 [Magnus]
... if this is the textual description it would be useful enough
15:36:03 [Magnus]
... if it's parsable that would be more useful
15:36:14 [francois]
PROPOSED RESOLUTION: use a URI in the HTTP VIA header comments field to advertise the CT-proxy's capabilities
15:36:14 [Magnus]
Francois: it looks like a good idea
15:36:40 [Magnus]
... this URI should link to a POWDEr descriptive doc
15:36:41 [kemp]
+1
15:36:46 [Magnus]
+1
15:36:47 [SeanP]
+1
15:36:53 [andrews]
+1
15:37:01 [francois]
RESOLUTION: use a URI in the HTTP VIA header comments field to advertise the CT-proxy's capabilities
15:37:03 [jo]
+1
15:37:22 [andrews]
+1
15:37:28 [Magnus]
Francois: let's move on
15:37:46 [Magnus]
... no other open questions here
15:38:05 [kemp]
q+
15:38:09 [Magnus]
Jo: the point is did we decide what to do about POST?
15:38:15 [Magnus]
Francois: no real problem?
15:38:18 [francois]
ack kemp
15:38:31 [Magnus]
Aaron: I must have missed this call. We must be able to do POST. I am unaware of the problem.
15:38:40 [Magnus]
... POST is important
15:38:45 [hgerlach]
+q
15:38:50 [Magnus]
Francois: that was the conclusion we had on the previous call
15:39:02 [francois]
ack hgerlach
15:39:16 [Magnus]
Heiko: the question is do we need an option where a user can opt in to break SSL?
15:39:38 [Magnus]
Francois: it's listed further in the sense that there's nothing the CT proxy should do
15:40:06 [Magnus]
... anyway, I saw it somewhere
15:40:38 [Magnus]
... it doesn't affect our discussions and no decisions so far regarding HTTPS rewriting
15:40:49 [Magnus]
Jo: question: are we assuming that it will not restructure?
15:41:00 [Magnus]
... a POST will not restructure?
15:41:18 [hgerlach]
+q
15:41:18 [Magnus]
... what about PUT?
15:41:30 [francois]
ack hgerlach
15:41:34 [Magnus]
Heiko: I think the request will never be modified - only the response
15:41:39 [kemp]
q+
15:41:42 [Magnus]
Jo: no, the headers are modified
15:41:48 [Magnus]
Heiko: but never the request body
15:42:16 [Magnus]
Francois: Jo, are you thinking of encoding of a document sent via PUT or POST?
15:42:21 [Magnus]
Jop: we just need to be clear
15:42:29 [Magnus]
... about the nature of intervention
15:42:42 [Magnus]
... there are any number of HTTP POST, HEAD, PUT that you can do in theory
15:42:55 [Magnus]
.. we shoudl be clear about the ones that are in scope
15:43:06 [Magnus]
... clarify what we are talking about
15:43:15 [dom]
s/Jop/Jo/
15:43:50 [francois]
q?
15:43:51 [francois]
ack kemp
15:43:55 [Magnus]
Aaron: there are cases where we modify the request body in a POST - encoding issues
15:44:10 [Magnus]
... suppose the mobile doesn't support an encoding that the server requires
15:44:14 [Magnus]
... we do this in some cases
15:44:24 [Magnus]
Heiko: this has never been in scope in the past at Vodafone
15:44:38 [Magnus]
Aaron: I don't want to be forbidden by the document
15:45:04 [Magnus]
Francois: as for the other commands, HTTP PUT etc, I', not so familiar with them
15:45:13 [Magnus]
... I only see it used at W3C
15:45:15 [jo]
[Jo to adjust text in 3.2 under "intervene in HTTPS" and remove the reference to HTTPS and add GET POST HEAD and PUT as the methods in scope, and put in a placeholder as to which parts of the request and response can be modified]
15:45:33 [Magnus]
... I don't know if there is a problem with them or not
15:46:02 [Magnus]
... let me give myself an action to adjust the text
15:46:15 [Magnus]
Francois: sounds great
15:46:21 [jo]
ACTION: Jo to adjust text in 3,2 per the previous note in the minutes
15:46:21 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-672 - Adjust text in 3,2 per the previous note in the minutes [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-03-04].
15:46:47 [hgerlach]
From: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9.html: The PUT method requests that the enclosed entity be stored under the supplied Request-URI., so I think this should not be affected by CT
15:46:51 [Magnus]
Francois: the whole point now is how should the proxy behave?
15:47:01 [hgerlach]
+q
15:47:04 [Magnus]
... is there any need to change UA header, what should we say?
15:47:07 [kemp]
q+
15:47:25 [francois]
ack hgerlach
15:47:34 [Magnus]
Heiko: I think we in general should not change UA header, but there are exceptions
15:47:54 [Magnus]
... if you need to bypass server-side restrictions on UA
15:48:13 [Magnus]
... we need a list of pages that do not work with device UA
15:48:41 [Magnus]
Francois: you don't change UA header by default, but add accept header
15:48:47 [Magnus]
Heicko: that's how it should work
15:48:54 [Magnus]
... we have had this issue at Vf UK
15:49:12 [Magnus]
... we always sent a fake UA header instead of the original UA
15:49:20 [Magnus]
... we must be sure that mobile sites will work
15:49:42 [Magnus]
... so content transformation must only be performed for non-mobile sites
15:49:57 [francois]
q?
15:50:01 [francois]
ack kemp
15:50:13 [Magnus]
Aaron: ideally I agree to not changing UA header
15:50:21 [andrews]
+q
15:50:27 [Magnus]
... but I disagree with the notion that most sites are mobile aware
15:50:47 [Magnus]
... I don't support leaving original UA header as the default
15:51:02 [Magnus]
... in the future don't masquerade, but we can't di that now
15:51:08 [Magnus]
s/di/do/
15:51:17 [francois]
ack andrews
15:51:28 [Magnus]
Andrew: I agree with Heiko's approach
15:51:39 [jo]
q+ to think that the default should be that the original user agent is not modified unless a 406 response is received or unless a 200 with a heuristically determined equivalent 406
15:51:43 [Magnus]
... the way we do CT today is discouraging mobile best practices
15:51:55 [Magnus]
... we want to encourage this instead (good mobile web design)
15:52:05 [Magnus]
... we are missing clear stats
15:52:11 [kemp]
q+
15:52:13 [Magnus]
... how many sites support mobiles
15:52:20 [francois]
ack jo
15:52:20 [Zakim]
jo, you wanted to think that the default should be that the original user agent is not modified unless a 406 response is received or unless a 200 with a heuristically determined
15:52:24 [Zakim]
... equivalent 406
15:52:39 [hgerlach]
Our priority must be on mobile internet/mobile sites, since we are making money with this sites, not with the other ones.
15:52:41 [Magnus]
Jo: dotmobi has done stuff in this area that I can't expand upon
15:52:59 [Magnus]
... we should be doing stuff that encourages people to build good mobile content
15:53:16 [Magnus]
... we must gibve them information to do that - like the original UA header
15:53:35 [Magnus]
s/gibve/give/
15:53:48 [hgerlach]
The 3rd is if it just answers with 200 OK and a written error message
15:53:57 [Magnus]
... I think we have to resolve that it is best practice
15:54:01 [Magnus]
... to preserve the UA header
15:54:07 [Magnus]
... and clean up the current mess
15:54:16 [Magnus]
... if we are telling them that POWDER is good practice
15:54:27 [Magnus]
... we are pushing the web in the right direction
15:54:32 [Magnus]
... instead of a cul-de-sac
15:54:37 [Magnus]
Francois: I agree
15:54:58 [Magnus]
... I just don't want us to go in the right direction if noone else follows
15:54:59 [francois]
q?
15:55:01 [francois]
ack kemp
15:55:08 [Magnus]
Aaron: I don't disagree, but it's not going to work
15:55:28 [Magnus]
... it's very hard to reliably handle a 200 response
15:55:54 [Magnus]
Francois: stats are confidential
15:56:05 [Magnus]
... this would be very useful to know
15:56:19 [Magnus]
Aaron: I will look into it
15:56:47 [Magnus]
Jo: speaking as WG chair: you can share confidentially
15:56:55 [Magnus]
Francois: it would be really useful
15:57:14 [Magnus]
... are we talking about 1% or 80% ?
15:57:15 [jo]
ACTION: Kemp to see if he can get some figures that scope the problem of bogus 200 responses
15:57:15 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-673 - See if he can get some figures that scope the problem of bogus 200 responses [on Aaron Kemp - due 2008-03-04].
15:57:25 [SeanP]
I basically agree with Aaron--there is also the case where the user actually wants a transformed version of the desktop site instead of the mobile version.
15:57:32 [Magnus]
zakim, unmute me
15:57:32 [Zakim]
Magnus should no longer be muted
15:58:09 [Zakim]
-Magnus
16:00:55 [francois]
ScribeNick: francois
16:01:04 [jo]
ACTION: Jo to produce new draft based on the many actions he has taken during this call :-) before BP meeting on THursday
16:01:04 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-674 - Produce new draft based on the many actions he has taken during this call :-) before BP meeting on THursday [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-03-04].
16:01:42 [Zakim]
-kemp
16:01:44 [Zakim]
-hgerlach
16:01:49 [francois]
Topic: Presentation to main body of the working group
16:01:50 [Zakim]
-SeanP
16:01:56 [Zakim]
-jo
16:02:04 [Zakim]
-AndrewS
16:02:13 [francois]
Jo: I'll be able to issue a new draft by next Thursday
16:02:16 [Zakim]
-francois
16:02:18 [Zakim]
MWI_BPWG(BCTF)10:00AM has ended
16:02:21 [jo]
FD: Next week's call is cancelled because of Seoul, so the next call will be in 2 weeks time
16:02:24 [Zakim]
Attendees were francois, +1.519.880.aaaa, kemp, Magnus, hgerlach, jo, SeanP, AndrewS
16:02:47 [francois]
francois: OK, I'll prepare a list of open questions/points that could be worth considering in the working group
16:02:54 [francois]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:02:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-bpwg-minutes.html francois
17:07:41 [francois]
zakim, bye
17:07:41 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #bpwg
17:07:44 [francois]
rrsagent, bye
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
I see 9 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-bpwg-actions.rdf :
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Kemp to draft section 2.6 listing user control options that SHOULD be supported [1]
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-bpwg-irc#T15-18-16
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jo to make 2.7 and 2.8 sub sections of 2.6 [2]
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-bpwg-irc#T15-20-31
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: JO to raise an ISSUE on labelling using POWDER describing transformation options on sites [3]
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-bpwg-irc#T15-23-00
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jo to remove sect 3.1 and transfer semantics to the present 3.3 [4]
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-bpwg-irc#T15-26-43
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jo to remove sect 3.1 and transfer semantics to the present 3.2 [5]
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-bpwg-irc#T15-27-11
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jo to update wording of sect 3.2 p 2 to clarify that the intent is not to respond with a transformed copy [6]
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-bpwg-irc#T15-28-58
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jo to adjust text in 3,2 per the previous note in the minutes [7]
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-bpwg-irc#T15-46-21
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Kemp to see if he can get some figures that scope the problem of bogus 200 responses [8]
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-bpwg-irc#T15-57-15
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jo to produce new draft based on the many actions he has taken during this call :-) before BP meeting on THursday [9]
17:07:44 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-bpwg-irc#T16-01-04