- From: Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 07:27:02 +0000
- To: "public-coremob@w3.org" <public-coremob@w3.org>
On 7/19/12 8:21 AM, "Jo Rabin" <jo@linguafranca.org> wrote: >On 18 Jul 2012, at 23:16, Tobie Langel wrote: > >> On 7/18/12 8:20 PM, "Jo Rabin" <jo@linguafranca.org> wrote: >> >>> What we're trying to do is answer the question: >>> >>> "Are the valid use cases for use of Network Information API in scope >>>for >>> CoreMob Level 1?" >>> >>> Raised as ISSUE-31 [2] in Tracker >>> >>> In order to answer that we need a) To know what the valid use cases >>>are, >>> and b) What is in scope for CoreMob Level 1. >> >> Use cases shouldn't only be valid, they should also be compelling. We've >> already rejected specs which had much more compelling use cases than >>these >> (e.g. WebGL). >> > >Fair point. Digging through the archives as I have been over the last >period, I find that Matt Kelly's ACTION-3 [1] "Circulate his research on >types of apps requiring types of features" >was mis-filed under my name. I suggest that the "compellingness" of the >use cases be judged against Matt's response to that action. >[1]https://www.w3.org/community/coremob/track/actions/3 > >>> Assuming that the valid use cases are documented correctly and >>>completely >>> on Tobie's Wiki Page[3] then all we have to decide is are they in scope >>> for Coremob Level 1 and the answer is ... >>> >>> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Support for Network Information API is in Scope >>>for >>> Coremob Level 1. >> >> I'd like to see real, compelling use cases before we make this spec a >> requirement. I'd also like to make sure vendors outside of Mozilla are >> planning to implement it in the forceable future. > >OK, planned implementation in the near term is a good test too. Though I >think that since Level 1 is aspirational, and is intended to encourage >implementation and conformance, it's a weaker test than being required >for the classes of apps that Level 1 is intended to cover - per the above. > >Hands up please if your organisation is planning to implement any time >soon. > >Let's see what happens in the following discussion before deciding >between the above PROPOSED RESOLUTION and the following: > >PROPOSED RESOLUTION: While we see valid use cases for Network Information >API we don't think that those use cases are sufficiently compelling for >Level 1 target applications and so resolve to defer to a future level. LGTM. --tobie
Received on Thursday, 19 July 2012 07:27:25 UTC