I'm finding that the Ringmark message is quite contradictory. Your initial Ringmark announcement (on the Facebook blog) states: "Ring Zero represents the base functionality that *most mobile phone* have today. Ring One represents what functionality is needed to unlock the most common apps that developers want to build; specifically, 2D games, music and video apps, and camera apps." This is in stark contrast to what you are now saying on this list: "Ring 0 is focused on giving developers an accurate view of what functionality is available for building *modern web apps on smartphones*. In that context, iOS Safari and the Android browser have nearly all of the market share." I think this lack of clarity needs to be remedied as there is already enough confusion in the marketplace about which browsers/platforms are the most popular and which features are supported (and how well) on each one. Like others, i'm also concerned that you've set the Ring 0 bar too high. I'm also worried that specifically naming iOS 5 and Froyo as starting points may cause these to become de-facto mobile quality benchmarks, deflecting away from the fact whole initiative is about feature testing, and that a user may well be using the Froyo platform version...but doing so with QQ, Opera Mini or Skyfire instead of the native browser. It's also not clear what a developer should do if a browser 'almost passes' the Ring 0 feature tests. Ultimately, the decision should be left up to each developer but the very wording of Level 0 (something less than zero is never considered good) may cause people to think otherwise. Steph On 5 Apr 2012, at 01:05, Matt Kelly wrote: > In that context, iOS Safari and the Android browser have nearly all of the market share.
Received on Thursday, 5 April 2012 12:28:15 UTC