- From: Romain <rdeltour@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 01:52:32 +0100
- To: Baldur Bjarnason <baldur@rebus.foundation>, W3C Publishing Working Group <public-publ-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Hadrien Gardeur <hadrien.gardeur@feedbooks.com>, Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com>, Ric Wright <rkwright@geofx.com>, "Ruffilo, Nick" <Nick.Ruffilo@ingramcontent.com>, Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
> On 11 Feb 2018, at 00:04, Baldur Bjarnason <baldur@rebus.foundation> wrote: > >> IMO, we need to figure out a full list of affordances and broadly define them. If we can't figure this out, I guess that we'll have to split things up, but there's a real risk in terms of consistency between implementations. > > (Apologies for the verbosity below. Went on for way too long. TL;DR: we should start with a list of affordances before we worry about implementation or even modes.) +1 I also agree with Baldur that each affordance can lead to potentially various implementation/specification approaches (ranging from existing or new API, CSS, HTML, WAM, you name it). Best, Romain.
Received on Sunday, 11 February 2018 00:52:58 UTC