Re: Sorting squares by difficulty/advancedness

All:

Organizing the rows with the difficulty level does makes sense.  I suggest we
follow that scheme.

Carmelo

''At 04:18 AM 4/14/2008, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:

>Hi,
>
>My understanding is the current order in the Web Compatibility Test [1]
>is more or less random, mostly derived from the order in which the tests
>were added/replaced.
>
>I'm thinking we could make the order a bit more significant, and I'm
>thus proposing that we order the squares roughly in order of difficulty
>or "advancedness" of the tested technology.
>
>Typically, the first row would have only well-established (but poorly
>implemented technologies; I would put in there: CSS2 min-width, gzip,
>PNG and HTTPS.
>
>The second row would have current technologies: SVG (static),
>XMLHTTPRequest, CSS Media Queries, and XHTML.
>
>The third row would group the technologies that have good potential for
>tomorrow: SVG animation, canvas, contenteditable, and CSS3 selectors.
>
>That way, the test would highlight more obviously if the tested browser
>is failing on the most basic stuff, or only on fairly advanced
>technologies.
>
>What do you think?
>
>Dom
>
>1. http://dev.w3.org/2008/mobile-test/test.html