Re: question about screen_size in Runtime and Security Model

On 04/03/13 11:44, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> This makes problematic assumptions about dimensions and pixel ratios, etc. and could end up conflicting with other parts of the platform (e.g., meta viewport and @viewport). And worst, we could end up specifying a useless feature that does nothing in practice.
> 
> In addition, this starts getting into dangerous territory of using these values to target particular device sizes. Unless we intend to have floating applications, I would strongly urge the WG to drop this. 
> 
> If, for business reasons, developers want to sell a tablet version and a phone version of their app, then they should do that through different origins:
> 
> hd.myapp.com
> phone.myapp.com

If I recall correctly, the problem Mozilla's apps team was raising was
not that related to business practices (sell two apps instead of one)
but mostly to prevent users to get an application that wouldn't look
good on their device. The same way a developer wouldn't want a user with
a device that doesn't support webgl to buy a 3d game, a developer
wouldn't want a 4" phone owner to buy an application that has been
optimized for a 10" tablet or even desktop/laptop usage. Actually, the
idea of buy/sell is a bit orthogonal here, the main problem being user
satisfaction and developer's reputation.

This is why I believe we should move this to 'required_features'. This
is actually nothing but a requirement for the device screen
size/dpi/whatever. I agree that the current manifest entry isn't great
but I would prefer to keep it until we find a replacement.

Cheers,
--
Mounir

Received on Saturday, 9 March 2013 18:49:47 UTC