W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-coremob@w3.org > May 2012

Re: Shall we shelve Level Zero?

From: Jet Villegas <jet@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 04:05:27 -0700 (PDT)
To: public-coremob@w3.org
Message-ID: <581044643.9917.1336043127167.JavaMail.root@mozilla.com>
I would prefer that the rings represent features like ring 0 == text, ring 1 == images, ring 2 == JavaScript, ring 3 == audio, ring 4 == video...

I also don't think that failing an inner ring should halt testing on outer rings. The web developer should be able to see the level of compatibility across several rings at once. For example, if a developer is trying to build an app that needs a ring 997 feature (let's say 'teleportation') they should be able to see if that works even if the browser has a bug with vertical Hiragana text in ring 42.

I also think we should grade the compatibility (not binary gray/green.)

-- Jet

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robin Berjon" <robin@berjon.com>
To: public-coremob@w3.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2012 7:24:30 AM
Subject: Shall we shelve Level Zero?

Dear all,

one thing that I've been wondering about concerning Level Zero (and that has been mentioned in discussions threads) is whether we need it at all (as a completely precise and defined document that is). The primary motivation behind Zero was to capture the existing situation for the usage of the Web that this group is concerned with (as described here[0]) so as to provide a foundation atop which to build Level One.

But documenting that status is both work-intensive and to a given degree somewhat contentious. At the same time, it may not be useful in helping developers (who already know that it's a mess) or implementers (who already know what they're missing to reach that level and who are already working on it if they don't already match). The question is therefore: can't we just assume that we have *rough* consensus on what we have (or are about to have) and simply work on agreeing on the set of features for Level One?

It's an open question, I don't presume to know the better answer.

Note that this does not preclude working on tests for Zero. These are still useful where we note that there are interoperability issues and a lack of testing support. It could be particularly useful for instance for quality of implementation testing (e.g. performance).

Thoughts? Screams? Joyous epiphanies?

[0] http://www.w3.org/community/coremob/wiki/Philosophy

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Sunday, 6 May 2012 05:25:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 19 April 2013 17:36:46 UTC