W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > April 2008

Re: ISSUE-245 (ADC The Un-Dead): ADC, A Wooden Stake and Some Garlic Needed [Mobile Web Applications Best Practices]

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 03:26:30 +0200
To: "Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich" <k.scheppe@telekom.de>, "Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group WG" <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.t9r8yga2wxe0ny@widsith.local>

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 17:54:30 +0200, Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich  
<k.scheppe@telekom.de> wrote:

> As per ACTION-737 I am going to do what I was already doing :-)
> I propose that we do come up with a means to exploit every capability,
> but should also take a subset of those capabilities and create a typical
> device of todays day and age.

So long as you set the requirement up front that it comes out compatible  
with Opera mini and Opera mobile I could live with that. Otherwise, I  
cconsider that the discussion will take too much of the working group's  
time, and not be able to move as fast as devices today, and that it is  
therefore a rat-hole worth avoiding.

> I believe that we should ask some questions regarding the intent of BP2:
> - is it merely a guideline on how to create good content with devices of
> today?

Not quite. It describes how to improve content by using capabilities that  
are *sometimes* or *often* available today, without wrecking the  
interoperability of the content by doing something as limiting as  
designing for a single browser on a single device.

> - do we implicitly state that any modern device will make a reasonable
> online experience possible?
>   no matter how badly the content is put together?

Of course not. There are a zillion ways to get things wrong - even  
following all our good advice. We cannot anticipate all of them. But there  
are some known ways to improve on common design patterns that are flawed,  
and design patterns that are known to be bad. We can advise how to avoid a  
bunch of pitfalls and how to take advantage of some good possiblilities.

Most modern devices have a number of browsers and other pieces of software  
available, so referring to a device is a bit misleading. (I have seen it  
used to turn statistics into really clear outright lies).

> - do we willfully refrain from helping authors who cannot use content
> adaptation by giving them a grouping of guidelines to adhere to?
>   After all, which devices can do what

Yes, because otherwise not only do we have to have Device Description, but  
we will have to spend a lot of time keeping an up to date repository and  
then even more time arguing about which browsers and devices we are going  
to put on our "in" list.

> - since technology will move on, whatever we write today will be
> outdated to tomorrow.
>   Do we think we will not be able to set a new bar, to define a new ADC
> when some other group comes along later?

I don't think we can set an ADC now and get consensus before what we say  
is outdated. I don't think a later group will be able to do so either.



Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals   Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com
Received on Friday, 18 April 2008 01:27:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:51 UTC