W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2010

Re: Positioned Layout proposal

From: Shelby Moore <shelby@coolpage.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 13:55:44 -0400
Message-ID: <0ab75a30f77fe69576d2d2838f71f973.squirrel@sm.webmail.pair.com>
To: "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Cc: "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>
> On 10/21/10 1:36 PM, Shelby Moore wrote:
>> Yup. But the big limitation right now in mobile least-common-denominator
>> is the battery, not the CPU.
>
> Uh... no.  They're just constraints on different things.  Note that the
> CPU is still a limitation on desktops in many cases, even when batteries
> are a non-issue.

You should know that I am an extreme proponent of not conflating concerns
(just ask Ian and Daniel :D).

Many people are thinking now about the smartphone as a least common
denominator of importance.  And I agree with you, they are orthogonal
concerns, because I will probably be forced to write an orthogonal version
of my website for smartphone.

However, with respect to a generalized layout algorithm that has to work
on all, then the battery on the smartphone may be the limiting least
common denominator of importance for many people that dictates which
algorithm can be used.  If one allows a choice of algorithms, then yes you
are correct, that the battery issue can remain orthogonal and not
supercede the CPU as the general limiting factor.

>> And on top of all that, I actually expect the more generalized model to
>> be
>> faster than current CSS, because we will automatically discover
>> optimizations that are obscured to us by our current proliferation
>> special
>> cases way-of-thinking about and implementing the relationships in code.
>
> I'm pretty skeptical of claims like this, but again willing to be proved
> wrong.  ;)

That is healthy. I am skeptical, but I am also love challenges and big
paradigm shifts. You only need one in your life to claim greatness and
change the world. Nevertheless we do have to prioritize and risky
adventures do have a resource cost.

What if someone had said that BGP routing was dealing with an infinite
domain and couldn't anneal?
Received on Thursday, 21 October 2010 17:56:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:33 GMT