- From: Sullivan, Bryan <BS3131@att.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:50:56 -0800
- To: "BPWG-Public" <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Sean, Mobile browsers are already pushing hard on the expectation that any internet web site is accessible (I don't have to name browser names). Its all over the media. It's actually been a near-reality (limited) for several years in some browsers. I agree, that forward looking is nice, but what it essential today is essential. I would not expect us to reference any draft or even hot off the press technology (but we can negotiate on that based upon the "hotness" of the technology). Re "anything that's not (X)HTML over HTTP is probably well out of scope": I don't think we want to be so limited. Web applications can be expressed in a variety of languages/schemas for which the basic issues of mobile use are the same. Syndication applications (e.g. ATOM/RSS readers and content upload applications) are an example of a web application that does not use XTHML (or at least have to). Re "I thought we were still talking about Traditional Web Browsing from mobile devices, for example": The "beyond" statement is there to specifically make it clear, that we are not limiting BP2 to advanced web browsers, though that may be the core focus. Re sharpening the "common delivery contexts" and "mobile application market" statements, I can agree. These will be developed as we get to the specific recommendations, but can be expanded on in the "Constraints and Capabilities of the Mobile Context" section. The intent was not to limit at this point, but to promote examples based upon priorities. You have expressed yours ((X)HTML web browsers), and I have others (phonetop widgets operating outside the browser sandbox). This will come out as we back up the statement "The focus of the BP2 document is on producing Best Practices that apply to the browser sandbox, while recognising that they may have broader applicability to the Web Runtime (CSS, HTML, Javascript, DOM, Persistent Storage, additional libraries, no browser chrome, cache, etc.), esp Mobile Widgets". What applies to the browser sandbox, if it can be reasonably applied outside the browser sandbox, will benefit from consideration of similar requirements outside that sandbox. Best regards, Bryan Sullivan | AT&T -----Original Message----- From: Sean Owen [mailto:srowen@google.com] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 2:23 PM To: Sullivan, Bryan Cc: BPWG-Public Subject: Re: ACTION-660: Input to BP2, Scope and Criteria On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Sullivan, Bryan <BS3131@att.com> wrote: > BP2 extends the focus to Web applications generally, which means an > application that is accessed and presented via Web technologies. Web > applications represent a spectrum of services and content, at the > simple end of which are typical Web browsing sites, presented in > browsers, which were the focus of BP1. The BP2 focus includes further > recommendations for addressing delivery context issues and for use of > advanced Web technologies, which apply both to browsers and > non-browser web runtime environments. [srowen] Maybe I am being cranky here but this says the scope is full (desktop?) web sites, and beyond, which seems far too broad for the Mobile Web Initiative. Do we mean we are talking about something besides (X)HTML? I heard talk of S60s and Widgets. One principle I'd like to establish is that this document is not forward-looking, really, but rather a summary of what people are really doing in the trenches today to make existing technologies work on existing devices. I'd like to agree on -- or debate that -- first. If we agree, then anything that's not (X)HTML over HTTP is probably well out of scope. And if we agree there then we can sharpen this text. I would write something like this... "BP2 addresses best practices for delivering content to mobile devices that are minimally capable of accessing Web content that was not specifically designed for mobile devices, and what steps authors may take to ensure that this Web content is still accessible and useful on such devices." > 1.4.1 Phasing > As discussed in the Scope document [Scope] there are many aspects to > Mobile Web Best Practices. BP2 represents the second phase of the Best > Practices development, i.e. beyond "Traditional Web Browsing". [srowen] This I think has to be clarified to be sure we are all taking about the same thing. I thought we were still talking about Traditional Web Browsing from mobile devices, for example. > The BP2 is not intended as a landscape document, e.g. a general > survey of technologies and related issues in the mobile context. > Recommendations are included here if they meet specific criteria: > > - are considered essential for successful deployment of web > applications in common delivery contexts > - are considered of fundamental importance to growth in the mobile > web application market > - can be readily verified through compliance testing, either > automated > (preferred) or manual [srowen] Same thing, just want to sharpen this. This doesn't yet give me an understanding of what specifically we are talking about, when we say common delivery contexts, mobile application market.
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2008 22:51:56 UTC