From MozillaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Meeting: Mobile Web Compatibility Weekly
Chair: Karl Dubost
Scribe: Mike Taylor

Topic: previous meeting, next meeting

Next meeting: The next meeting will be on October 14, 2013 [lm] I suggest we cancel the meeting on Oct 7 due to the Summit and have our next meeting on Oct 14.

Topic: Summit Open Sessions

Are these confirmed? For all 3 locations? mike in Toronto, Hallvors in Brussels. Brad in Brussels. Vishy in Santa Clara. Lawrence in Toronto. Karl will not be at the summit.

  • miketaylr: We submitted an open session for Web compatibility at the summit. For localized Web compatibility and DIY for Web Compatibility.
  • lmandel: Alan is responsible for all the open session. There should be a mail today to everyone about the open sessions. All the sessions have been accepted (to verify). So It should be ok.
  • blassey: do we have separate sessions for each topics or borth topics in one session.
  • hallvors: That will my first. I don't know how many people to expect, what type of people, how to run the session depends on who will be there.
  • lmandel: It will be also depending on how you frame it? How you describe it. "About Web compatibility" vs "How to be traveling to the moon with UA detection."
  • miketaylr: The format is open?
  • lmandel: do not expect to have a video projector. Share links about the topics.
  • blassey: do we have someone in Santa-Clara?
  • lmandel: who will be in Santa-Clara?
  • Vishy: when are the free slots? If saturday afternoon, I can help. Miketaylr and hallvors can help me.
  • lmandel: Jason Smith or Tony Chung can help you too.
  • Wishy: that would be great.
  • Miketaylr: what are our expectations? greater mindshare? Actively involved?
  • lmandel: *Actively involved* It's the key focus for getting mindshare and all the rest. I want volunteers more than employees. People who have a sense of ownerships. We could define titles for this role such as content partner relations, etc.
  • blassey: We want ownership for the locale and build recognitions into it.
  • lmandel: It's an opportunity for people to get involved.
  • blassey: Do not forget to get the people to get involved.
  • miketaylr: There is a community of Brazilian coming to Toronto.
  • lmandel: Could you try to reframe the session in terms of community ownership.
  • miketaylr: I will do and send to Lawrence before the end of today.
  • blassey: we have a good connection with the local community of localizers in Brazil. That would be a good start too.

Topic: UA detection and generic Device ID (lmandel)

Some frameworks seems dependent to have the pattern for a BLAH device ID in the string.
(Mobile; BLAH; rv:18.1) (mike: which ones?)
Should we provide a generic device id (independent of constructor)?
What would be the consequences?
Does it improve the issues?

  • miketaylr: I don't think that will be problematic. Look for Mobile, check that Android is not there. An extra token will not break anything, I guess. Without dashes or specific characters. Here's an example strategy that this would be compatible with:
  • lmandel: we have recommendations on how to create a good device ID. Guide for device Model Inclusion. To check it doesn't break the regex.
  • vishy: The version number will change too.
  • lmandel: we do not want them to sniff for the version.
  • miketaylr: The DetectRight people wanted to know the version of Gecko related to the version number of Firefox OS.
  • lmandel: We need to document that.
  • kdubost: Why do we have the number in the 1st place.
  • miketaylr: necessary for scripts.
  • kdubost: if we give hooks, we need to document them at least.
  • lmandel: @@@
  • miketaylr: It's useful at least for analytics. It can be worthwhile for the marketshare.
  • lmandel: day to day testing. We should test with device ID strings too to see if it's breaking.
  • kdubost: related to the version number we've identified at least one site that is breaking based on the version number "18.0" vs. "18.1"
  • miketaylr: Any recommendations on length.
  • lmandel: shortest as possible.

Topic: Success Criteria (lmandel)

Want to continue to bring up this topic until we hit on something. Have people had a chance to think about defining our team success and your personal success?

  • lmandel: targeted at mike, hallvors and karl.
  • miketaylr: If we could measure involvements of the community. Bugs commented by non employees.
  • blassey: A goal for outreach, who owns what in the community. Two things here: how are we going to measure ourselves and what are our goals?
  • lmandel:
  • karl: measuring things is not hard. there are lots of things to measure. the issue is to come up with metrics which are meaningful. success criteria is much harder. it's a very hard exercise to do this after you've started a project, rather than defining beforehand and having those define the work that you do. we can prove that we're making progress. but was it successful?
  • vishy: what about taking something very simple like a quarterly goal like the company is doing. some simple metric based on locale, alexa, etc.
  • karl: but my point is you can't control that. we could set that as a goal, we could try to reach it. but failing that goal does not mean we failed the mission because there is so much outside of our control.
  • vishy: that's perfectly fine. the charter of sitecompat is to provide compatibility with our products. if everybody wakes up one day and starts doing the right thing, so be it.
  • lawrence: there's something to be said for defining what we need. regardless of the fact whether or not we had something to do with the success of top X sites being compatible, the fact is we've done the outreach or testing, etc.
  • hallvord: testing, analysis we can control. it's the last little mile of getting sites to fix themselves is what we can't control. but up to that point, we are in control of.
  • karl: and we can measure this.

lawrence: there is a certain measure of control that we do have, but ultimately it's up to the site. i wouldn't want to make any assertions like we will have 100% of this bucket fixed. but something like X sites out of a bucket

  • brad: i think having 100% of sites contacted by some metric is entirely reasonable.

hallvord: there's a little bit of a dilemma because that's the step that easiest to get people involved with.

  • lawrence: but it doesn't have to be us. it's more valuable if hallvord and mike never did that and other people picked it up that would be ideal. then we can check off the boxes next to community involvement and sites working, etc.
  • (discussion drifting to the bugs and community involvement)
  • hallvord: do we actually manage to pick up the incoming bugs? is FxOS triage good enough to get the bugs to us?
  • brad: i'll make sure this continues to happen (moving things to Tech Evangelism).
  • hallvord:
  • karl: we might need to advertise more the web compatibility form.
  • brad: maybe we can make a contest about it. whoever reports the most bugs.

lawrence: we need to be careful with that, so it's not gamed. in the past it's been abused.

  • hallvors: It would be good to have real users of the Web site, so they can inspect just not the home page but all the features of the Web site.
  • blassey: It would be good to have some people of specific locales for dealing with issues related to their own languages.
  • kdubost: do you have a deadline?
  • lmandel: not really, but we need it for ourselves. if we don't scope this according to our own goals, this is an unbounded problem.
  • kdubost: would a monthly or weekly statistics report be helpful to understand what we're doing? hallvord, did you make progress on that or should i try to do it?
  • hallvord: i tried to track the metrics. but i think it would be a good idea. if you want to start writing that, go ahead.
  • vishy: i think there's a lot of good work happening. it might be good to send out an email either bi-weekly or monthly to a larger audience. this might start to generate larger interests within the company.
  • lawrence: we've talked about this, i think this is a good idea. karl, hallvord if you already have ideas about the kinds of metrics to share, let's do that.
  • vishy: it could be a) to give insight b) progress c) engagement
  • lawrence: happy to help with that. happy to give updates in the project meetings. or whoever wants to do that is welcome.
  • miketaylr: LET'S DO IT.

Topic: Work This Week

What will you be working on during the next week?

  • blassey:
  • hallvors: summit preparations. Test review, test run.
  • jsmith:
  • kdubost: bugs and a bit of docs for Moz employes with regards to Web Compatibility
  • lmandel:
  • miketaylr: finish up "commitgrep" tool, triage, summit prep

Topic: Broken Voices of the Web

Topic: Web Compatibility Progress

This week bug for the new batch of modifications on ua-override-prefs.js is Bug DONE


NEW (1 week)

Tracked Actions


(move the DONE action items below and add the string DONE and possibly link to the record)

  • TODO-20130715-01: kdubost have a panorama of tools used by Web developers for testing. Write a post about it.
  • TODO-20130805-02: hallvord to test in bulk if Web sites are still working with a device information into the UA string Firefox OS. (Bug 901039)
  • TODO-20130806-01: kdubost to create a script to automatically compile stats from Tech Evangelism - Mobile. See email.
  • TODO-20130819-01 kdubost to create a first workflow for Web Badges for the community with Carla Cassili
  • TODO-20130819-03: lmandel to follow up with Gerv about posting UA device/model recommendations on MDN.
  • TODO-20130826-01: kdubost to create an intro guide to be ready to participate to Web Compatibility effort.
  • TODO-20130826-02: kdubost to create 101 on Web compatibility issues so Mozilla employes have handy materials to discuss with partners.
  • TODO-20130916-01: kdubost make a quick review of the documentation on MDN and see how it should be organized and/or modify to work with Chris about it. [ONGOING]