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

FW: ACTION-593 Write a summary of preliminary work to be done for this working group to focus on Best Practices for Web applications

From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 19:43:12 -0000
Message-ID: <C8FFD98530207F40BD8D2CAD608B50B4B88340@mtldsvr01.DotMobi.local>
To: "BPWG-Public" <public-bpwg@w3.org>

At risk of stoking a fire that already seems to be burning nicely, I am
forwarding this under Bryan's ACTION-660 for the benefit of Trackbot.

Jo



-----Original Message-----
From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich
Sent: 15 February 2008 11:33
To: BPWG-Public
Subject: FW: ACTION-593 Write a summary of preliminary work to be done
for this working group to focus on Best Practices for Web applications


For what it's worth, despite that fact that we had closed this action, I
did find the text which may still have some pertinence.

-- Kai
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 6:50 PM
> To: BPWG
> Subject: ACTION-593 Write a summary of preliminary work to be 
> done for this working group to focus on Best Practices for 
> Web applications
> 
> ACTION-593 Write a summary of preliminary work to be done for 
> this working group to focus on Best Practices for Web applications
> 
> For the work done in BPWG under Charter 2 and for BP 2.0 we 
> have determined that the next document will be in the focus 
> of web applications.
> 
> While it is implicit that some ground work has to be done to 
> allow work on web applications to progress, we determined to 
> explicitly put down some of this ground work through this action:
> 
> 
> Things to take care of prior to engaging in web applications 
> related work, in no particular order:
> 
> - determine what if and what of BP 1.0 needs to be reexamined 
> or built upon for a generic BP 2.0 document.  I.e. are there 
> gaps left in 1.0 that need closing and will this help us to 
> further improve the creation of mobile suitable content.
> 
> - are there any techniques or guidelines to be offered which 
> belong(ed) more in the realm of mobileOK Pro, which should be 
> addressed now? Meaning can we, because we are now dealing 
> with more sophisticated devices, issue new and better BPs?
> 
> - determine which type of device we are writing the BP 2.0 
> document for (what are our expections in its capabilities?)
> 
> - determine the scope of BP 2.0.  Where do we not want to go?
> 
> - formulate specific goals that we wish to achieve with 
> producing this document?  
> 
> - formulate our expectations as to what should change in 
> public usage of mobile content once we publish this document.
> 
> 
> -- Kai
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 15 February 2008 19:43:33 UTC

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