[whatwg] Proposal for a web application descriptor

I think making mock-ups would be great- it will make it easier to check
the UX behavior in such context, where as always the user attention and
the handling of the device is slightly different.

Mock-ups will make it easier to also make the design similar- or rather
recognizable- between usage contexts, which i think is a desired feature
of the solution.

And the API should be the same, I agree.


---G?ran


On 2011-05-01 19.05, "Simon Heckmann" <simon at simonheckmann.de> wrote:

>Well, the API should work in both cases, I guess. On mobile devices the
>UI design would be more challenging, but the idea is the same. If desired
>I could also design mock-ups for phones.
>
>Am 01.05.2011 um 18:31 schrieb G?ran Eriksson AP
><goran.ap.eriksson at ericsson.com>:
>
>> Hi Simon,
>> 
>> Just to be certain, I'd like to ask if You are targeting desktop browser
>> in mobile devices, such as iPad and iPhones, as well, or is Your
>>proposal
>> focused on PC/laptop devices?
>> 
>> Kind Regards
>> G?ran
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 2011-05-01 16.49, "Simon Heckmann" <simon at simonheckmann.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hello everyone,
>>> 
>>> After reading all your comments I partly re-tought some of my ideas.
>>> First of all it might not be the best idea to create a full application
>>> descriptor if it would only be used to specify permissions.
>>>Additionally,
>>> I can see why people do not want to be asked for all permissions at
>>>once.
>>> However, I on the other hand do not want to be asked for all
>>>permissions
>>> separately. After reading some of the links posted in this discussion I
>>> modified my proposal a little. You can find the new version here:
>>> 
>>>    http://www.simonheckmann.de/proposal/draft2
>>> 
>>> While the first part has not changed much, the second part is all-new
>>>and
>>> includes two completely re-modeled mock-ups.
>>> 
>>> Again, comments are welcome.
>>> 
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Simon Heckmann
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Am 30.04.2011 um 17:23 schrieb Robert O'Callahan:
>>> 
>>>> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 1:52 AM, Glenn Maynard <glenn at zewt.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 5:23 AM, Robert O'Callahan
>>>>> <robert at ocallahan.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> The application could have a settings page with a checkbox "Enable
>>>>> desktop
>>>>> notifications". When you click on that box, the browser shows its
>>>>> (passive,
>>>>> asynchronous) UI for enabling desktop notifications for that
>>>>> application.
>>>>> 
>>>>> This still implies having an API to ask for permission for a feature
>>>>> before
>>>>> using it.  (Web Notifications has a draft for this:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebNotifications/publish/FeaturePermissi
>>>>>on
>>>>> s.html
>>>>> .)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Also, many developers won't want a UI like that, since when you
>>>>> disable a
>>>>> feature and expect users to enable it in settings, a lot of them
>>>>>won't.
>>>>> Many people never look at settings pages at all.  Pages are more
>>>>> likely to
>>>>> request permissions as soon as they can.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Notifications are a particularly hard case for the principle of
>>>> requesting
>>>> permissions in response to user action, because the whole point of
>>>> notifications is that they happen when the user isn't giving the
>>>> application
>>>> attention :-).
>>>> 
>>>> Another possible approach would be to have the default be for
>>>> notifications
>>>> to show up in browser UI associated with the page --- e.g., highlight
>>>> the
>>>> tab title and show the notification(s) at the top of the page if you
>>>> switch
>>>> to the tab --- and in that notification-showing UI, offer a "show on
>>>> desktop" button which lets the notifications for that application
>>>> migrate to
>>>> the desktop --- effectively a permission grant.
>>>> 
>>>> Of course, asking each of these while using the application would also
>>>> be
>>>>> painfully annoying, and it's not obvious how to make permissions
>>>>> meaningful
>>>>> to the user (eg. when you use its feature) while also scaling to lots
>>>>> of
>>>>> permissions.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I think we have to consider specific cases. For Skype, it depends on
>>>> whether
>>>> all those permissions are really needed, and why... It might not be
>>>>that
>>>> hard to figure out how to make on-demand permission grants
>>>> intelligible. We
>>>> owe it to users to try.
>>>> 
>>>> Rob
>>>> -- 
>>>> "Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians,
>>>> for
>>>> they received the message with great eagerness and examined the
>>>> Scriptures
>>>> every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11]
>>>

Received on Sunday, 1 May 2011 12:17:18 UTC