- From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:39:59 +0000
- To: Anne Arndt <arndt.anne@gmail.com>
- Cc: Josh Soref <jsoref@rim.com>, Core Mobile <public-coremob@w3.org>
Hi Anne, On Wednesday, February 29, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Anne Arndt wrote: > > I'll just add that the site I am talking about is, as it's something I'm working on now that covers both mobile and desktop: > > > > http://specs.wacapps.net/ > > > > I'm happy for people to rip it apart as part of the discussion. I'll throw it into the mix because I consider myself a pretty average Web developer so hopefully the site is representative of what "average web devs" are doing - it's hand made (+some libs like jQuery, Modenizr, etc.). And the budget and time constraints and visitor data (tracked through Google Analytics) I talk about is real - though I won't share any numbers. > Great! As far as I am aware the WAC widget runtime you are talking about is already used (mainly in Asia). Is there any feedback from developers developing WAC widgets based on this spec so far? Sorry about the confusion. The site I pointed to is only used as an example of a "mobile/desktop" site, but I did not want to draw any attention to the content of the site itself (specially not the WAC APIs or Widgets!). Hence, widgets have little or no place in this discussion (but I am happy to chat about them off list if you would like). Having said that, widget developers may have their own set of gripes about developing for mobile devices (irrespective of the WAC APIs or widgets). I've personally have not received any feedback from Web developers using the WAC runtimes in Asia - nor know if any such data has been collected by WAC ( In the interest of full disclosure, I merely contract for WAC as a spec editor and Web Monkey, so I don't have any insight beyond that). -- Marcos Caceres
Received on Wednesday, 29 February 2012 17:40:34 UTC