- From: Bill Sempf <bill@pointweb.net>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 23:13:16 -0500
- To: "Sylvain Hellegouarch" <sh@defuze.org>, <public-webapi@w3.org>
-----Original Message----- Sylvain Hellegouarch Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 5:08 PM To: public-webapi@w3.org >> So I submit that the addition of a tag or DOM method to handle history >> in Ajax is a non-issue, and Mr. Heaton is correct, "Maybe we just need >> to be smart about the way we design and develop our applications, and >> a set of best practices perhaps." >I agree overall but the problem is: >Web application such as GMail, Flickr or else are already widely used, most >web site developers want or are required to intoduce bits and pieces of Web >applications without actually being tagged as truely web applications (they >can just be community portal or static pages with a twist of Ajax stuff) >but the bottom line is that they are all hosted by the same browser. They >are not considered by regular users as different. >I mean, ask someone not in the IT field to define "Web application" and I >don't think you'll get something as precise as we want to define here. >My point is that we should be careful when we try to put a distinction >between web sites and web applications. As long as people will have to go >through the same browser to use them, I think they won't see a fundamental >difference between the two. I agree, and disagree, in classic bipolar style. On one hand, I agree that the casual, subtle conversion of web sites into web applications will continue to lull the user into the illusion of continuation of paradigm. If you click on a link, and have the perception of a normal user, you expect the next page to work just like the last. Links to information, or fields and a button. On the other hand, there might be something to pointing out to the user that they are about to launch an application. Use of something to the tune of "Click here to launch the XYZ application" would start to clue the users in, but this group certainly can't enforce that. Nonetheless, it would certainly benefit everyone to begin to create some kind of distinction, don't you think? Should there be something that creates a divide in the user's mind between reading and interacting, or is that a bad idea? S
Received on Tuesday, 3 January 2006 04:11:29 UTC