- From: Scott Wilson <scott.bradley.wilson@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:28:05 +0100
- To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <chaals@opera.com>
- Cc: "public-coremob@w3.org" <public-coremob@w3.org>, "Robert Shilston" <robert.shilston@ft.com>, "Tobie Langel" <tobie@fb.com>
On 11 Jun 2012, at 10:21, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:13:34 +0200, Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com> wrote: > >> On 6/11/12 11:05 AM, "Charles McCathieNevile" <chaals@opera.com> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 23:03:36 +0200, Robert Shilston >>> <robert.shilston@ft.com> wrote: >>> >>>> 2) Ability to create home screen / chrome-less web apps without needing >>>> >>>> native wrappers. A combination of >>>> https://people.mozilla.com/~anarayanan/webapps.html and the Fullscreen >>>> API will help this. >>> >>> Apart from lack of broad implementation (which is obviously a >>> show-stopper for practical deployment of an app), do you have any >>> comments about what widgets did wrong in this area? >> >> Outside of the name? :-P > > Seriously, I think the name turned people off - and while that seems silly it was also a real problem. I'd like to understand what other real problems existed in that technology stack, because I have found a lot of things it got right (other than deployment). I was only partly joking when I suggested re-publishing the specs doing a search-replace of "widget" with "webapp"... > (Feel free to redirect answers to the "public-native-web-apps@w3.org" <public-native-web-apps@w3.org> community group, BTW. In fact, I would encourage you to do that...) > > cheers > > -- > Charles 'chaals' McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group > je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg kan noen norsk > http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com >
Received on Monday, 11 June 2012 10:28:43 UTC