Re: [W3C Webmob] Profiles?

On Jan 23, 2014, at 3:39 AM, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:

> On 23/01/2014 03:17, SULLIVAN, BRYAN L wrote:
> If we avoid problematic words but arrive at the same destination I am
> happy. I am not a fan of arbitrary lists or vocabulary prohibitions,
> and do not recommend that W3C engage in either. But reasoned focus on
> priorities given real-world use cases, yes. Whatever you accept to
> call that, I'm ok with it.

Just wondering about the underlying assumption though. It seems the idea is that as an app developer, I'll look at the technologies listed as supported in a "profile" to decide what my app should use. But isn't it the other way around? I build my web app with technologies that I need, and that informs what my app's required "profile" is. Then only browsers/devices that support those (through feature-detection) will be able to use it. Though admittedly, devs will also look at sites like caniuse.com to determine which technologies are considered "safe"...so perhaps it's more from this angle that we should strive to tackle it?

<Bryan> as noted in another email, once TTWF is off the ground and a database of verified, comprehensive (re devices, browsers, spec features) has been built up, yes devs will just be able to reliably check if features are supported and make their own decisions as they do today (though with less reliable data today). What W3C or any other org that considers priorities can do, is use that data also to help highlight and take actions on weaknesses in the web platform.

P
-- 
Patrick H. Lauke
______________________________________________________________
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]

www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com | http://flickr.com/photos/redux/
______________________________________________________________
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
______________________________________________________________

Received on Thursday, 23 January 2014 13:52:23 UTC