W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-mwts@w3.org > February 2008

Re: mobile acid test content (was: [agenda] Tuesday December 17 Teleconf)

From: Wilhelm Joys Andersen <wilhelmja@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 16:07:42 +0100
To: public-mwts@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.t514a4ztm3w6te@kugalskapet>


Thanks a lot for your feedback. I have added most of your tests to the  


* Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> wrote:
| Not too sure about that one... I'm not sure a full imperative graphics
| API is so well-fitted for mobile devices (due to the CPU/battery penalty
| it implies); but maybe that's a concern that shouldn't impact the design
| of the test.

If we want to test to which extent any browser supports the full web, we  
should probably include this.

|>   - XML
| What do you have in mind with that?

Load a document with an XML MIME-type. Not all browsers support this.

|>   - contenteditable
| Not too sure about that one - with the same worry as earlier, i.e. its
| fitness on mobile devices.

The current generation of mobile browsers do not support this, but I  
believe that will change. Editing raw HTML when updating their blog is not  
something most users want to do, regardless of what kind of device they  
are using.

| I think we should not have WML in the mix; I don't think WML is looking
| forward, but rather backward.

Good point.

| [...]
| Here is a test for Unicode support, although I'm not really sure this is
| what you had in mind:

I'm not entirely sure myself. (c:

| [...]
| I'm using the object tag, but maybe we should target the video tag
| instead? although again, the current standardization status of HTML 5
| makes it hard to decide if targeting it might not be too premature.

I believe we should wait with this. There is no consensus on the baseline  
format for the <video> element.

Wilhelm Joys Andersen
Core QA, Opera Software
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2008 15:08:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:08:02 UTC