See also: IRC log
dka: Not a lot of activity on the
mailing list since we last met, and lots of regrets for
today
... Alan and Kai both send regrets, which rules out any
discussion on BP2 or the addendum to BP1
... Adam will have a new draft of BP2 ready for next Tuesday
tho.
... the idea being to issue a new draft prior to that
telecon.
<francois> mobileOK Checker re-factoring details
francois: We talked about this a
couple of weeks ago. During the F2F I agreed to refactor the
mobileOK Checker library to make it more flexible. I'm mostly done and
committed.
... Don't think I need to go deeply into coding considerations
here; but the new version isn't totally backwards-compatible,
other than from an external POV.
... Any questions or comments, feel free to email the checker
mailing list or contact me privately.
... Small TODOs have been listed in the code itself, I'll do
some minor editing in the upcoming days.
francois: I tried to detail as much as possible what I did. I regenerated the library javadocs. The code is the same as before, but now you can make your dreams come true and extend the library without having to touch the library itself.
yeliz: Thanks. Can we use the code, or are there some more changes to be made?
francois: I'll make some minor ones, but nothing that makes a difference to how you plug into the library.
dka: what impact does this have on the validator itself, the W3C mobileOK checker? When does the code you've written become the code that underlies the checker?
francois: none, I've not released
it so far. What was mobileOK is still mobileOK. I still need to
make a few small changes, at this point I wouldn't consider it
to be 100% stable though it passes our test suite.
... I have no schedule right now, but ASAP. The new version
should be more performant (multithreading was improved whilst
doing it).
... The Korean guys should be able to build on top of it to
create a derivation of the mobileOK standard, and Yeliz should
be able to add file support.
dka: we should make sure the new version is released to the HUGE SERVER FARM that W3C has installed to run the validator
nacho: we haven't had enough time
to review the code from Francois
... but we'll take a look at it and keep in touch during the
week
<francois> ACTION-916?
<trackbot> ACTION-916 -- François Daoust to prepare some material for F2F identifying what changes would be needed to the mobileOK checker to allow subclassing for file: scheme handling -- due 2009-03-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/916
<francois> close ACTION-916
<trackbot> ACTION-916 Prepare some material for F2F identifying what changes would be needed to the mobileOK checker to allow subclassing for file: scheme handling closed
dka: no update from Jo
... is a new updated draft needed before we can go any
further?
francois: I have 2 actions: an
hour to send a summary on the same-origin policy test
conformance. I would like to send my findings to the mailing
list before we discuss it. It's mostly ready.
... The second is on the x-device header registration and I
haven't had time to make any progress on this
<DKA> ACTION-922?
<trackbot> ACTION-922 -- Jonathan Jeon to look at how the existing headings could be improved and to propose classiification groupings that are orthogonal (don't talk about the same things) -- due 2009-04-01 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/922
<DKA> Jonathan - do you have an update on this action?
<JonathanJ> Past week, I have sent a proposal for ACTION-922.
<JonathanJ> http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pI9qmqLP3vij6U574ZhUeCQ&hl=ko
<francois> Jonathan's proposal
dka: the idea was to reclassify
some of the sections within BP2
... I don't think we can have this conversation with Adam on
the call, but we can close off the action.
<JonathanJ> OK.
dka: and next week when we're discussing BP2 we can incorporate this.
francois: Is the idea to change the heading for the time being?
dka: during the F2F Jonathan made
a proposal (a good one) that we should use a cross-referencing
scheme for the different BPs and BP2.0
... so if we're still having them in a hierarchical structure,
we'll need one that doesn't conflict with that tagging.
francois: this is the renaming of sub-headings, and we need to come up with some tagging for BP?
dka: yes.
... to an extent this is editorial. So it's good to do and to
think about, but doesn't change the recommendations, it's a
better way to find or classify them.
<francois> close ACTION-922
<trackbot> ACTION-922 Look at how the existing headings could be improved and to propose classiification groupings that are orthogonal (don't talk about the same things) closed
dka: meanwhile, back at the
actions... I don't see much else we can talk about today in
terms of actions on these documents.
... lots of folks aren't here or are on holiday.
francois: nothing else from me
dka: we should close the call, unless anyone has anything else they'd like to raise?
<DKA> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/open
<DKA> <silence for emphasis>
dka: back next week then!
<nacho> bye all
<yeliz_> bye
<JonathanJ> bye