Re: Re:HTML5 was: Scope Proposal

On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:12:26 +0100, jonathan chetwynd  
<j.chetwynd@btconnect.com> wrote:

> my email 'Syntax and vocabulary' was perhaps overtly obscurantist.

I didn't think so.

> the underlying concern expressed is whether the members of this  
> community are solely interested in HTML5 as a gaming platform,
> or wether there is a quorum interested in conceiving and developing a  
> web gaming language to which HTML5 is merely a stepping stone.

 From Opera's perspective I don't think we'd want to put priority on a new  
gaming language, and would rather see *this* group focus on incremental  
changes to the existing standards which support important use cases and  
requirements for gaming.

(I don't think it is a terrible idea to look at a more ambitious project  
of creating a games language, I just think it is beyon the scope of this  
group and beyond our area of current interest or priority).

cheers

Chaals

> On 10 Nov 2011, at 08:36, Conceiro Igueregui, Alexander wrote:
>
>> I think that if you´re using HTML5 technologies is assumed that you are  
>> targeting mobile devices also (maybe in the long run) not only desktop.  
>> At least that is our case.
>> But maybe, you're right and there's a need to differenciate needs for  
>> mobile users. We're not seeing any word on mobile devices in some  
>> proposed specs and would be of interest to us if we can target  
>> different devices using the same codebase and API (obvious).
>>
>> my 0,02 cents
>> a.
>>
>> De: Lars Knudsen [mailto:larsgk@gmail.com]
>> Enviado el: jueves, 10 de noviembre de 2011 5:42
>> Para: Boaz Sender
>> CC: Grady Laksmono; Andrew Baker; w3c@marcosc.com;  
>> gmthundercat@gmail.com; public-games@w3.org; scheib@google.com
>> Asunto: Re: Scope Proposal
>>
>> I think it looks good.  However, I'd like to hear if people think there  
>> might be a reason to include some specification on what would be  
>> recommended for desktop, mobile and anything between?  The reason for  
>> this question is that I had the impression in our group talk that most  
>> people were primarily focusing on the desktop side of things, while  
>> mobile might have different needs.  Some features will even be done  
>> very differently while addressing a similar issue (like the mouse lock  
>> + fullscreen + orientation lock discussion we had).  There would  
>> probably also be different hardware considerations.
>>
>> just my EUR 0.02
>>
>> - Lars
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Boaz Sender <boaz@bocoup.com> wrote:
>> I've tried to synthesize everyone's suggestions in this charter:
>>
>> """
>> The goal of the games community group is to improve the quality of open  
>> web standards that game developers rely on to create games. This is  
>> done by:
>>   * Tracking specifications and vendor implementations related to open  
>> web games.
>>   * Recommending new specifications to be produced and finding working  
>> group homes for them.
>>   * Refining use cases to communicate specific needs of games.
>>   * Evangelizing specifications to browser vendors.
>>   * Documenting how to best use open web standards for games
>>   * Evangelizing open web standards to game developers and game  
>> development best practices to web developers
>>
>>
>> The games community group will not develop any specifications, and  
>> thus, there will not be any Essential Claims under the W3C Contributor  
>> License Agreement or Final Specification Agreement.
>> """
>>
>> Any last words before we publish it tomorrow?
>>
>> -Boaz
>> --
>> Boaz Sender
>> http://bocoup.com | 1-617-379-2752
>> 355 Congress St, Boston MA, 02210
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Grady Laksmono <glaksmono@zynga.com>  
>> wrote:
>> It's probably meant following web standards for maximum performance?
>>
>> Grady Laksmono
>> Server Engineer | Los Angeles
>> phone 818.564.7239
>>
>> From: Andrew Baker <andrew_j_baker2@hotmail.com>
>> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 07:12:45 -0800
>> To: "w3c@marcosc.com" <w3c@marcosc.com>, "gmthundercat@gmail.com"  
>> <gmthundercat@gmail.com>
>> Cc: "public-games@w3.org" <public-games@w3.org>, "scheib@google.com"  
>> <scheib@google.com>, "boaz@bocoup.com" <boaz@bocoup.com>
>> Subject: RE: Scope Proposal
>>
>> Are we interested in quality? Or suitability? Or both?
>>
>> > Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 16:10:47 +0100
>> > From: w3c@marcosc.com
>> > To: gmthundercat@gmail.com
>> > CC: public-games@w3.org; scheib@google.com; boaz@bocoup.com
>> > Subject: Re: Scope Proposal
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tuesday, November 8, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Ben Adams wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > The goal of the games community group is to improve the quality  
>> of games the can be built using open web standards. This is done by:
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > I don't think this is accurate: we don't improve the quality of  
>> games, only game developers can do that.
>> >
>> > It should read:
>> >
>> > The goal of the games community group is to improve the quality of  
>> open web standards that game developers rely on to create games.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Charles 'chaals' McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg kan litt norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com

Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 10:25:47 UTC