ISSUE-246 (Rocinante): Name of BP2 / Relationship to BP1 [Mobile Web Applications Best Practices]

ISSUE-246 (Rocinante): Name of BP2 / Relationship to BP1 [Mobile Web Applications Best Practices]

http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/

Raised by: Jo Rabin
On product: Mobile Web Applications Best Practices

There seems to be a thread on these topics that is worth gathering under a propoer issue.

The name of the document was decided, I think, to be Mobile Web Applications Best Practices. The Tagline BP 2 is a working title and shouldn't be used in Public (oops, this is in public). I don't know whether this puts that half of the issue to rest.

The second part is the relationship to BP1 which I agree benefits from being spelled out in probably painful detail.

Here's a starter for some structure on this (most already in the document I think):

1) BP 2 is supplementary to BP1
2) BP 1 should be followed when nothing is known about device capabilities
3) BP 2 should be followed where something is known about device capabilites
a) either by a priori knowledge (e.g. from a DDR)
b) or by reflection
[See section BP-2 5.9 for a discussion of this]
c) or both
4) BP2 fills in on BP1's "Exploit Device Capabilities" and also fills in on BP1's MINIMIZE and maybe a couple of others. 
5) It's an open question as to whether it does, or should, introduce topics that have not previously been mentioned but glossed over in BP1. There's no reason why not, in principle, it's just that we cut a whole load of proposed BPs from BP 1 on the basis that they were not Mobile Specific etc.  I think we are likely to find the same things happening in BP2, to keep it in scope and within charter.

Jo

Received on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 17:54:57 UTC