- From: Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich <k.scheppe@telekom.de>
- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:00:12 +0100
- To: "Sullivan, Bryan" <BS3131@att.com>, "Jo Rabin" <jrabin@mtld.mobi>, "BPWG-Public" <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Hi Bryan, For clarification, "determine which type of device we are writing the BP 2.0 document for (what are our expections in its capabilities?)" was in reference to the ADC. Also, as a side note, there is a lingering question as to what /*is*/ a mobile device. While most would agree that a laptop is not and a PDA is, I think we left off at saying that the device should say what it is, which in turn might be influenced by user choice. -- Kai > -----Original Message----- > From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sullivan, Bryan > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 10:25 PM > To: Jo Rabin; BPWG-Public > Subject: RE: ACTION-593 Write a summary of preliminary work > to be done for this working group to focus on Best Practices > for Web applications > > > Thanks, Jo. > > Here is my input. > > Re "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.": I started that by the text in the requirements > section. Other aspects that need to be carried forward and > improved upon are welcome. > > Re "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?": > Some of these (e.g. use of cookies and redirect) have been > proposed in the requirements. I welcome other aspects as well. > > Re "determine which type of device we are writing the BP 2.0 > document for (what are our expections in its capabilities?)": > my take is that we are still talking about mobile devices, > mostly at their core intended as mobile phones, with > significant constraints on input/output and resources in > general. I would cut the line at the "micro-PC" (as beyond > the scope), e.g. those devices which are intended to be > micro-sized versions of full desktop/laptop PC's. > > Re "determine the scope of BP 2.0. Where do we not want to > go?": There is some of this in the current draft, but more is welcome. > > Best regards, > Bryan Sullivan | AT&T > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jo Rabin > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 11:43 AM > 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 > > > 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 Tuesday, 19 February 2008 08:00:28 UTC