Re: WebPlatform Browser Support Info

On Oct 19, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Tobie Langel <tobie@w3.org> wrote:

> On Saturday, October 19, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Niels Leenheer wrote:
>> On Oct 19, 2013, at 7:50 AM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org (mailto:schepers@w3.org)> wrote:
>>> URLs can still be unique, especially if we concatenate:
>>> 
>>> {
>>> "uuid":"http://data.webplatform.org/browser/ie/9/windows",
>>> "browser":"Internet Explorer",
>>> "vendor":"Microsoft",
>>> "version":"9",
>>> "os":"windows",
>>> }
>>> 
>>> ... or:
>>> 
>>> {
>>> "uuid":"http://data.webplatform.org/browser/chrome/30.0.1599.69/osx",
>>> "browser":"Chrome",
>>> "vendor":"Google",
>>> "version":"30.0.1599.69",
>>> "os":"osx",
>>> }
>>> 
>>> Those URLS are longer than the UUIDs you proposed, but they are human readable, unique, rather intuitive, and flexible.
>> 
>> 
>> Ooh. I like this. We do need to create a registry with browser names and os names, to ensure everybody uses the same urls.
>> Perhaps we can add one more level for platform type and one for manufacturer/model?
>> 
>> Then it would be flexible enough to do thinks like:
>> 
>> http://data.webplatform.org/browser/desktop/chrome/30
>> http://data.webplatform.org/browser/desktop/chrome/30/osx
>> http://data.webplatform.org/browser/desktop/chrome/30/osx/10.8
>> 
>> Or:
>> 
>> http://data.webplatform.org/browser/mobile/android/4.2
>> http://data.webplatform.org/browser/mobile/android/4.2/samsung
>> http://data.webplatform.org/browser/mobile/android/4.2/samsung/galaxy-s3
>> 
>> Or:
>> 
>> http://data.webplatform.org/browser/mobile/chrome/30
>> http://data.webplatform.org/browser/mobile/chrome/30/android/4.2
> 
> So what would these URLs actually point to?
> 
> My feeling is you don't really want to consider this info as a data object in itself but as a filter, which is why I'd imagine it much more in a query string then in the url itself. E.g.: filtering the test results for test foobar:
> 
> …/tests/foobar?browser=chrome&device-manufacturer=samsung&device-family=galaxy&device-model=s3
> 
> --tobie  
> 

Thinking some more on this, I do not actually believe we need to define a universal browser id at all for exchanging data.

The format we are talking about is basically a list of browsers and a list of results. Each result is linked to one of the browsers. Why use external ids at all? Why not simply use a free form internal id that is only valid for the document itself.

Something like this:

{
	id:	'myownbrowserid1',
	vendor:	'Microsoft',
	browser: 'Internet Explorer',
	version:	'10'
}

And the results would look like:

{
	browser:	'myownbrowserid1',
	test: ''data.webplatform.org/test/w3c/navigator.battery",
	result: ["passed"]
}

If all the fields in the browser definition would be optional, we could use as much specificity as we want:

{
	id:	'myownbrowserid2',
	vendor:	'Mozilla',
	browser: 'Firefox',
	version:	'20',
	type: 'desktop'
}

or

{
	id:	'myownbrowserid3',
	vendor:	'Mozilla',
	browser: 'Firefox',
	version:	'20',
	type: 'mobile'
}

or 

{
	id:	'myownbrowserid4',
	vendor:	'Mozilla',
	browser: 'Firefox',
	version:	'20',
	type: 'mobile',
	os: 'android'
}

or:

{
	id:	'myownbrowserid4',
	vendor:	'Google',
	browser: 'Chrome',
	version:	'30',
	type: 'mobile',
	os: 'android',
	ua: 'Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.0.4; LG-E970 Build/IMM76L) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/30.0.1599.82 Mobile Safari/537.36'
}

Cheers,

Niels
html5test.com

Received on Saturday, 19 October 2013 13:37:57 UTC