W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: [Window/View Modes] Naming + Feature vs. Query: suggested changes

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 12:23:36 +0200
Message-ID: <b21a10670908180323y32e7a1abpfa9b69c965255986@mail.gmail.com>
To: Marcin Hanclik <Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com>
Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Marcin
Hanclik<Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am now editing the Window Modes document.
> It seems there is inconsistency in the naming of core subject of the Window/View Modes specification.
>
> P&C uses "viewmodes" XML attribute [1].
> P&C refers to: "[Widgets-Views] Widgets 1.0: Media Query Extensions."
>
> WM has the title "Window Modes and ..." [2].
> WM uses in CSS "widget-mode" features [2] and "widgetMode" attribute [3].
> A&E uses "viewMode" Web IDL attribute [4].
> My suggestion is to unify the related naming convention.
>
> IMHO, the spec defines new media feature (widget-mode/widget-viewmode) [5], but does not define new media queries or their new syntax [6].
> So we should add the proper title to reflect this fact.
> E.g.
>
> @media handheld and (widget-mode: widget) and (orientation: landscape) {
>
> }
>
> is proper MQ syntax [6].
>
> The suggested changes are:
> 1. Rename the specification to:
> "Widgets 1.0: View Modes and Media Features"
> a. The link " http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-wm/" could be changed to "http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-vm/"

I support this change

> 2. Rename the media feature from "widget-mode" to "widget-view-mode".\

Can we just call it "view-mode"?

> 3. Modify the Web IDL IF from
>
> interface WidgetModeChangeEvent : Event {
>  readonly attribute DOMString widgetMode;
> ...
> };
>
> to
>
> interface WidgetViewModeChangeEvent : Event {
>  readonly attribute DOMString widgetViewMode;
> ...
> };

Again, just "viewMode"

> I would like to proceed with these editorial changes asap (e.g. have it done before our next telco), and I just would like first to consult with the group whether there are any objections or comments wrt the above modifications.
>

As far as I am concerned, go forth and spec! :)


-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Tuesday, 18 August 2009 10:24:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:33 GMT