- From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 23:31:35 -0700
- To: Scott Jenson <scott@jenson.org>
- Cc: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, public-closingthegap@w3.org
On Tuesday, 2 April 2013 at 14:52, Scott Jenson wrote: > Fair enough, I will still reiterate (from a design point of view) that there should be more 'web apps' that really truly behave like apps, and not wanna-be apps with legacy web cruft (like a URI type in bar) tacked on and serving little purpose. Before I start a flame war, > BTW, I don't think you are expressing anything particularly controversial here. There are lots of different ways to expose browser chrome as appropriate and required (to aid users). I get a sense that what you mean by "web cruft" is just you thinking of traditional Web browser UX designs on mobile devices. We have already seen the start of a re-imagination of what the browser can be on a mobile device from various browser vendors (e.g., IE10 on Windows 8 tablets, Opera's Ice, and I'm sure we will see more… we are perhaps at an interesting transitional period). Remember that a lot of "good" comes with browser's now syncing across devices (e.g., passwords, tabs, bookmarks, etc.)… and it could also suck to lose those things through some kind of "applification". > if people want to build 'apps' with the full browser chrome, knock yourself out, I'm not against that. However, like you, I believe in choice and I hope our discussion of web apps allows me to choose to loose much of the legacy browser UI... > I agree, but it may naturally go away as we continue to understand the new form factors that multi-modality enabled mobile devices are now affording us. Consider the eye-tracking scrolling addition that Samsung made recently to the mobile browser with the launch of the S4. I've not played with that (and can't say if it's gimmicky or not), but those kinds of additions/innovations could potentially do away with pieces of browser chrome traditionally needed by legacy browser UX designs. I guess what I am asking is: what do developers really need? what is really fundamental? what do users need? These are all really hard questions. Or should it just be enough to copy the app experience 1-to-1 just to "bridge the gap"? Personally, I would be sad if we did go down the 1-to-1 route on the user experience side. I'm hopeful that we can go beyond that, even if matching the 1-to-1 feel is the starting point (as Apache Cordoba has more or less shown possible to achieve). It's been good to tease out what things make the Web different from native - and we should not be afraid to also consider *widening the gap* further with native, because, as has already been discussed, there are things that make the Web really unique as an open platform (despite its limitations). -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Thursday, 4 April 2013 07:03:49 UTC