RE: [ACTION-908] good practice for login forms

Francois Daoust wrote:
> Isn't multi-serving behind the [CAPABILITIES] best practice?
>   http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/#CAPABILITIES
> MWABP is built around this best practice.
> 
> I don't understand why we would need to reject the concept of a DDC.
> Multi-serving is recommended to improve the user experience on
specific
> classes of devices. The DDC is for the default experience.


To my mind this document is about taking up where BP1 left off on
[CAPABILITIES] - the Abstract to BP2 says:

"The recommendations expand upon statements made in the Mobile Web Best
Practices 1.0 (BP1), especially concerning statements that relate to the
exploitation of device capabilities and awareness of the delivery
context."

That doesn't seem to be specifically followed up in the Introduction,
which perhaps it should be.

As to the need for adaptation, multi-serving etc. We explicitly state
that in 1.3.4 - I'm not sure it needs to be called out any further, but
perhaps it might, given that we seem to have a thread on the subject. As
Adam points out later, we have discussed the need for an Appendix
spelling out the properties that are implied by this document.

"1.3.4 Delivery Context

Requirements on delivery context have not been made explicitly, but most
best practices assume devices with basic XHTML, JavaScript, and CSS
compliance. Additionally, some best practices are relevant only if the
device exposes certain capabilities (for example, access to device
information such as location).

Implied by this discussion is that some level of device knowledge and
content adaptation is required. For best practices specifically related
to this area, see 3.6.1 Use Server-side Capability Detection for Device
Properties and 3.6.2 Use Client-side Capability Detection for Device
State."

Jo



> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org]
On
> Behalf Of Francois Daoust
> Sent: 04 February 2009 21:20
> To: Luca Passani
> Cc: public-bpwg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [ACTION-908] good practice for login forms
> 
> 
> Luca Passani wrote:
> >
> > Francois Daoust wrote:
> >>
> >> Sure, but we're not talking about a BP for the Mobile Web Best
> >> Practices (MWBP) recommendation here. We're talking about a BP for
the
> >> Mobile Web Application Best Practices (MWABP) draft.
> >>
> >> There is no DDC in MWABP. See section 1.3.4:
> >>
> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/BestPractices-2.0/ED-
> mobile-bp2-20090101#d1e256
> >>
> >>
> >> The goal of these additional best practices is to exploit devices
> >> capabilities when you know about them. For instance, many of the
best
> >> practices only apply when the mobile device has support for
scripting,
> >> and thus do not target DDC-like devices.
> >
> > I see. Apologies for the confusion.
> >
> > So does MWABP rejects the concept of a DDC and fully embraces the
idea
> > that multi-serving is necessary?
> 
> Isn't multi-serving behind the [CAPABILITIES] best practice?
>   http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/#CAPABILITIES
> MWABP is built around this best practice.
> 
> I don't understand why we would need to reject the concept of a DDC.
> Multi-serving is recommended to improve the user experience on
specific
> classes of devices. The DDC is for the default experience.
> 
> I would not use the term "necessary", but "recommended", sure!
> 
> 
> >
> > if no, where is the MWABP DDC defined?
> >
> > if yes, some of the practices listed may no longer be good practices
in
> > case of multiserving.
> 
> Could you point them out?
> 
> 
> >
> > Also, the spec seems to be sort of inconsistent with the CT stuff (a
> > transcoder may wreck havoc in the Json, CSS, scripting, XHR() that
go
> > from the HTTP server to the client).
> 
> There is an active discussion to have transcoders respect mobile
content
> explicitly flagged as such. I'm much in favor of it. "The best
practices
> need to be protected" is indeed the main argument in my view.
> 
> Francois.
> 
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Luca
> >
> >
> >
>

Received on Monday, 9 February 2009 06:09:10 UTC