W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-mw4d@w3.org > June 2009

RE: new updated roadmap available

From: Raphaël Dard <Dard@intracen.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:20:20 +0200
Message-Id: <4A255F53.8DE1.0088.0@intracen.org>
To: "Renjish Kumar" <renjish.kumar@gmail.com>, "N.G. (Nicolas) Chevrollier" <nicolas.chevrollier@tno.nl>, "Stephane Boyera" <boyera@w3.org>
Cc: <public-mw4d@w3.org>
Yes Nicolas, that's right.

And also make recommendations on what works (or should work) where, and
(shortly) why.
i.e. relation between technologies and contexts.

Thanks for summarizing!
Cheers,
Raphaël


>>> "Chevrollier, N.G. (Nicolas)" <nicolas.chevrollier@tno.nl>
02/06/2009 16:49 >>>
Hi all,

Raphael, to make sure I understand. What you are proposing is:
- main challenges (as already in Stephan's proposal)
- technologies plus and minus (as already in Stephan's proposal)
- relation between challenges and technology  + on-going innovations
and R&D outlook

If so I like it very much as putting the technology before the
challenges might be a bit confusing (as the technology addresses already
these challenges).

Best,
Nicolas

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-mw4d-request@w3.org [mailto:public-mw4d-request@w3.org]
On
> Behalf Of Raphaël Dard
> Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 4:22 PM
> To: Renjish Kumar; Stephane Boyera
> Cc: public-mw4d@w3.org 
> Subject: Re: new updated roadmap available
> 
> Hi Stephan, Renjish and all,
> 
> Your exchange suggests an important aspect. If the group is working
on
> "mobile web for development", I guess we also need to have a small
> section on:
> - General issues/challenges the mobile solutions can/should address
(in
> the development context),
> 
> then,
> - Specific advantages and challenges of each mobile technology (i.e.
> SMS vs GPRS, etc.)
> should indeed be closely linked with
> - Major challenges for developing and accessing mobile services.
> 
> Here we need to remember that we talk about a long list of countries
> and almost as many specific contexts (including within countries
> themselves, urban/rural, etc.). We may want to categorize contexts
in
> order to point to adapted/suitable solutions.
> 
> Finally, typing content into the road map will reveal to us what
> structure makes more sense. Maybe we could also make use of internal
> document links?
> 
> Steph, what process would you suggest, so that we make the best
> collaborative writing effort?
> I know that wikipedia (mediawiki) has a discussion page attached to
> each article and it seems to do wonders. Maybe you could create such
a
> page (roadmapv2-discussion), so we centralize all the discussion
points?
> Multiplying and dispersed emails seem less efficient.
> 
> Last point to share, I found that "subscribing" to
> http://www.w3.org/2008/MW4D/wiki/roadmapv2 is quite useful as I am
> told (by email) when changes have occurred in the page.
> 
> Cheers,
> Raphaël
> 
> 
> 
> >>> Stephane Boyera <boyera@w3.org> 02/06/2009 10:04 >>>
> Hi Renjish,
> 
> Thanks for your comments. my views:
> 
> > Shall we bring in the technology section before the challenges?
> >
> > By this, we can summarize the status quo on available
technologies,
> > tools etc... and then discuss the challenges (which includes the
> market
> > and technology challenges), most of which you have listed.
> 
> That sounds indeed reasonable. Let's hear what other people think.
> 
> > I presume that the conclusions section will discuss the potential
> > directions to be taken? Can we have this as a separate section
before
> 
> > conclusions and then keep conclusions as a more general and brief
> > summary of the key items in the document?
> 
> In my view, the direction to be taken would appear in both
technology
> and challenges section.
> Particularly, in the challenges section, for each identified item,
when
> 
> possible, we might be able to propose workaround that possible today
in
> 
> specific cases, and more long term R&D or standardization
activities.
> e.g. for illiteracy and content in local languages, possible options
> today is to either use trusted intermediaries (e.g. VPO) or to use
> non-textual channel such as voice. On more longer term, the
association
> 
> of menaingful icons with voice annotation is a potential direction
to
> follow. so that's why i propose that future directions to be
explored
> in
> each challenge. and also in each technology when appropriate. e.g.
in
> voice, availability of fully standard-compliant free and open source
> voice browser, or definition of usability guidelines are challenges
> tied
> to a specific technology and should appear in the releated section.
> 
> best
> Stephane
> > Regards
> > Renjish
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Stephane Boyera <boyera@w3.org 
> > <mailto:boyera@w3.org>> wrote:
> >
> >     Dear All,
> >
> >     as promised, i worked a the new instance of the roadmap i
> presented
> >     during last call.
> >     I tried to integrate the resolution and discussions we had
last
> week.
> >     For those who were on the call during the may 18 call, please
let
> em
> >     know if i forgot some stuff.
> >
> >     The new version is at
> >     http://www.w3.org/2008/MW4D/wiki/roadmapv2 
> >
> >     i prefered to create a plain new uri. i put a deprecated flag
on
> the
> >     previous one (http://www.w3.org/2008/MW4D/wiki/roadmap )
> >     and link the new one from the wiki MW4D home
> >     (http://www.w3.org/2008/MW4D/wiki/MW4D ) and the Mw4D home
> >     (ressource section) http://www.w3.org/2008/MW4D/ 
> >
> >     all comments are welcome, and we will continue discussion
during
> >     next call (June 8)
> >
> >     Cheers
> >     Stephane
> >     --
> >     Stephane Boyera         stephane@w3.org
<mailto:stephane@w3.org>
> >     W3C                             +33 (0) 5 61 86 13 08
> >     BP 93                           fax: +33 (0) 4 92 38 78 22
> >     F-06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex,
> >     France
> >
> >
> 
> --
> Stephane Boyera		stephane@w3.org 
> W3C				+33 (0) 5 61 86 13 08
> BP 93				fax: +33 (0) 4 92 38 78 22
> F-06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex,
> France
> 

This e-mail and its contents are subject to the DISCLAIMER at
http://www.tno.nl/disclaimer/email.html 
Received on Tuesday, 2 June 2009 15:21:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:07:09 UTC