W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-and-tv@w3.org > February 2012

Re: [profile] Profile spec title

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 15:24:00 +0100
Cc: public-web-and-tv@w3.org
Message-Id: <491757BE-F401-4006-BD45-47B8E11E17AA@berjon.com>
To: Philipp Hoschka <ph@w3.org>
On Feb 7, 2012, at 16:53 , Philipp Hoschka wrote:
> Given a choice between profile and guidelines, I'd prefer profile - guidelines in W3C are often "authoring guidelines" (etc. accessibility guidelines etc.) or "best practices", whereas this is something else - also, W3C did have "profiles" in the past describing tech subsets (CSS mobile profile)

Different people put different ideas behind the word "profile" but the perception in the broader community is often tarnished by the fact that most specifications that have had profiles have been interoperability nightmares involving the creation of silos where we didn't need one and supersubsets the features of which were hard for developers to remember and use compared to the baseline technology that was being profiles.

That's why there haven't been recent (that I know of at least) W3C specifications called "profiles"  it's a loaded word that scares people away (even when the intentions were good).

Given that the goal of this document (as I understand it) is to create an interoperable ecosystem rather than a silo for TV, how about "Web and TV Platform"? It's simple, positive, and something stable to build upon.

PS: yay, bikeshed!

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2012 14:27:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:44:06 UTC