W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: HTML Device element status

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 14:18:12 +0200
To: public-webapps@w3.org, "Rich Tibbett" <rich.tibbett@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <op.vfe8gmr864w2qv@annevk-t60>
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 13:41:27 +0200, Rich Tibbett <rich.tibbett@gmail.com>  
> I know first hand that we don't deal in roadmaps, but should we assign  
> some priority to fleshing out such a fundamental element as <device>?

<device> was proposed to the DAP WG, not the WebApps WG. Other than that  
detailed planning of new features does not really work well. They need to  
evolve iteratively and at this point I think we need some kind of  
experimental implementation to see whether the feature can work at all.  
That will also give us a better idea whether overloading <device> is a  
sensible idea. Overloading went pretty badly with <object>. There are some  
advantages with <input>, but overall the design is ugly. Maybe here it  
makes sense but we should do some prototyping to be sure.

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Tuesday, 6 July 2010 12:18:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:09 UTC