RE: [W3C Webmob] Profiles?

(Marcos wrote)
...
On Thursday, January 23, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Tobie Langel wrote:
...
> The aim of the original Coremob report was to identify a number of pressing issues and help the industry focus around them in order to enable developers to build the kind of applications which were highly successful on native platforms.
> 
> This is still relevant today.
> 
> However, a profile-based approach really isn't the best way to drive this effort.

I wonder if we can go back to the basics: what problem is a "profile" actually trying to solve? If we can get that, we can look at alternatives that are more palatable to those of us with the violent allergic reaction to the word "profile" :) 

Bryan: can you help use understand your needs a bit more by describing the above? Please try to just describe the problem and not how a profile addresses the problem.  

<bryan> I think that Tobie expressed it pretty clearly. Take Web & TV for example: task forces were setup to address specific areas, and concrete results were initiated in WGs e.g. HTML5 Video MSE and EME. No, this did not require a profiling effort and I am glad, since it appears the problematic part is having to define the solid baseline upon which we are trying to build, to close specific problematic gaps in where we want to go. If we don't have to create that baseline profile, and we can focus just on the part that is problematic, I am fine with that. 
I am hopeful that TTWF will prevent the need to go beyond that, as the "profile" effort was overall intended to document (1) what can be relied upon, and is important; (2) what is important but still troublesome. Both of those things can become inherently clear, once we have a comprehensive database of test results that is continually updated as browsers evolve and are deployed on myriad devices that are tested.

Received on Friday, 24 January 2014 18:48:53 UTC