W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-appformats@w3.org > May 2007

Re: [widgets-reqs] re: CC/PP, Delivery Context and Media Queries (comment 10) (was: Comments on http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-widgets-reqs-20070209)

From: Grassel Guido (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki) <guido.grassel@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 09:32:17 +0300
To: ext Marcos Caceres <m.caceres@qut.edu.au>, <bert@w3.org>, "WAF WG (public)" <public-appformats@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C25E0B21.15BA4%guido.grassel@nokia.com>

Marcos, WG

Lets be clear here: CC/PP does not lead anywhere. Also its WAPF / OMA
-defines mobile counterpart UAProf has very limited success. The main
problems are lack of interoperability of device capability vocabularies and
architecture issues in my opinion. Sending all the capabilities with each
HTTP.req is just not feasible, too much bandwidth. The update mechanism for
static, server-side profiles has issues as well, because the client needs to
know the details of the server-side profile , otherwise it can not achieve
the right updated profile by sending the needed changes.

Ad Media queries:
I think MQs are useful for Widgets. Many Web Applications, such as Widgets,
that are more like general purpose user interfaces than documents, will want
to adapt their user interface to the display characteristics where the user
agent is running.

Where should MQs be used?
I see most use for MQs for selecting CSS styles. I see less need for using
MQs for switching between startup (index.html) files in the manifest file.
In the latter case it would be used for switching between variants of the
content. I do not really like this. I like to avoid authoring separate
index.html files for different devices for much the arguments why CSS

- Guido

In the time perspective of the Widget 1.0 spec, MQs

On 5/2/07 7:55 AM, "ext Marcos Caceres" <m.caceres@qut.edu.au> wrote:

> This is a response to Bert Bos' review [1] of the Widgets 1.0
> Requirements document [2].
>>   1.1.2. Standardizable Aspects of a Widget
>> COMMENT 10) Ad "The APIs that authors can use": Should this mention
>> CC/PP, Delivery Context and Media Queries? It's probably a good idea to
>> re-use existing vocabularies in designing these APIs.
> We have yet to evaluate the appropriateness of any of those
> technologies listed to what is actually used in the wild (eg. I have
> not seen any widgets use CC/PP or make effective use of Media
> Queries). As you have suggested, there are currently a number of
> working groups looking at the issue of APIs for accessing device
> services/capabilities. We currently feel that specifying APIs that
> access services on devices are out of scope for WAF but will continue
> to monitor what other groups are doing (particularly those at the W3C
> and OMA in regards to Delivery Contexts).

Kind Regards
- Guido

Guido Grassel, Nokia Research Center, guido.grassel@nokia.com
Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2007 06:31:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:50:07 UTC