Re: Proposals from the task force

I just did a very quick read-through.  I'll read it more carefully 
later, but wanted to make a couple of comments.

I think there are some opinions in there that are fine coming from a 
particular individual or org, but may not be good in something if 
presented as the view of something like this task force.  Also, it seems 
some places this is already underway.

1. "The W3C is working on multiple documents on moving the core web 
application platform forward, the primary one being Core Mobile Web 
Platform 
<http://coremob.github.io/coremob-2012/FR-coremob-20130131.html#derived-requirements>. 
"

It depends on what as meant be the lower case "core web application 
platform".  It it means the general Open Web Platform, then cormob isn't 
the primary spec guiding W3C.  It's a report from a Community Group.

2. "In the court of public opinion, the war between native apps and web 
apps appears to be over. Even though the web world is valiantly and 
consistently improving the web platform, the world seems to have moved 
on, embracing and rewarding native apps." ... "The web has been on it's 
back footing for too long, aspiring to catch up to the legacy of the 
iPhone native app model."

Probably not conclusions everyone would want to see attributed to W3C. 
(though of course fine as an individual, company or some other org's 
conclusion if that's what they think.).

There is no clear definition of web apps.  Sometimes it means a regular 
web page that provides some app-like capability.  Sometimes it means 
what looks like a standalone, native app but running in the same context 
as a browser but without chrome (so doesn't look like a Browser).  
Sometimes it means what looks like a standalone app, but running in a 
runtime that has a different application and security model than a 
Browser.  Sometimes it's a hybrid app that looks like a native app (but 
can include native code and wrapped to look like a native app on some 
system).

As far as standalone apps with the same capabilities as native apps that 
can run across all the OSs out there unchanged -- well, that isn't 
available yet.  That's what the SysApps WG is about.  So too early to 
judge success, but definitely being addressed.  Hybrid apps on the other 
hand are widely used.  The web itself is phenomenally successful.

More generally, I don't think we should pitch this task force in terms 
of any competition with anything else.  it should be about is developing 
web technologies - finding out what's missing and what should be 
developed next to create a useful platform.

3. "Web UX Style 1: Native App replacement"

isn't this what we see in Firefox OS, Chrome OS, Tizen, Windows 8, 
WebOS?   That's what the SysApps WG is about.  They went through the 
exercise of figuring out which specs to create first to enable that and 
are underway.  that seems the place I think to discuss a lot of what 
this paper is about.  The SysApps WG was created to explore capabilities 
beyond the usual Browser sandbox, capabilities not safe for the Browser 
sandbox then.

4. "Web UX Style 2: On demand interaction"
This sounds like the Network Service Discovery spec[1] from the DAP WG.

5. "Web UX Style 3: Multi Screen interaction"
The description isn't about the title of the section.  It seems similar 
to the On demand interaction section above it.  It seems like it's about 
the Network Service Discovery spec (using existing local network 
discovery) and maybe also about Web Intents (from DAP WG and Web Apps WG 
- but sort of dead at the moment until someone figures out how to do it).

The multi-screen interaction part seemed the part that is new, that 
isn't being worked on now (I think).  It may be worth looking into what 
in that would need to be exposed in a web page.  Where is it something a 
Web Browser could handle without the app knowing and where does the app 
need to know and guide how other screens are used. Is anything needed 
more than general device service discovery?  that type of question.







[1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/dap/raw-file/tip/discovery-api/Overview.html




On 5/29/2013 8:52 AM, Scott Jenson wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org 
> <mailto:dom@w3.org>> wrote:
>
>     Scott sent a document that aims at framing the various types of
>     Web Apps
>     user experiences that can be designed:
>     https://docs.google.com/a/jenson.org/document/d/1wcXubh-yUtViwtUG4o43v3jeO6P1T63EWTh4iw2iHy8/edit?pli=1
>
>     But ideally, I would still like to see derived actions from that
>     landscape; also, Scott is still awaiting for specific comments
>     from the
>     task force :)
>
>
> Exactly, as I said in the conference call, I'm fairly new to W3C and 
> I'd like to make sure this document is useful to this crowd. As it 
> reads now, it is rather high level, trying to create vocabulary and 
> attempting to organize and motivate some the various task forces (as 
> well as implying new ones).
>
> Bottom line: it would be helpful to get your feedback.
>
> Scott