Re: WebPlatform Browser Support phased approach?

Right now I do not export prefix information yet.

Yesterday I’ve added support for this and later today I will expose it on the beta website itself. Once new data starts coming in, I can also expose it in the exported data.

Cheers,

Niels
html5test.com


On 31 Oct 2013, at 11:26, Ronald Mansveld <ronald@ronaldmansveld.nl> wrote:

> MDN shows two versions if that happens: one with the initial support with prefix, and another entry with the support without prefix. So I can actually extrapolate that info to the inbetween versions.
> 
> AFAIA both H5T and CIU will provide prefix-information per version.
> 
> 
> Julee schreef op 2013-10-30 17:11:
>> Hi, Ronald! Good news!
>> How do both methods deal with dropped prefixes?
>> J
>> ----------------------------
>> julee@adobe.com
>> @adobejulee
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ronald Mansveld <ronald@ronaldmansveld.nl>
>> Date: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 at 8:29 AM
>> To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
>> Cc: julee <julee@adobe.com>, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>, Niels
>> Leenheer <info@html5test.com>, "public-webplatform-tests@w3.org"
>> <public-webplatform-tests@w3.org>
>> Subject: Re: WebPlatform Browser Support phased approach?
>>> OK, I've come a long way so far. There is just one decision to be made:
>>> MDN provides the compat data not per version, but rather a
>>> since-version.
>>> Both caniuse and html5test provide the data per version (where
>>> available).
>>> What do we want to use? I can collapse the data from caniuse and
>>> html5test to a since version pretty easily. Expanding the data from MDN
>>> from a since-version up to a complete version-range might be doable as
>>> well, although I have to rely on the browser-data provided in the feeds
>>> from CIU and H5T to determine what versions are available.
>>> Anyone with arguments towards or against either option?
>>> Ronald
>>> Doug Schepers schreef op 2013-10-29 06:18:
>>>> Hi, Ronald­
>>>> Since we're going with this phased approach (which I fully support),
>>>> I think we should do 2 things:
>>>> 1) Use the MDN data as the baseline, since they have fairly complete
>>>> data and a similar feature level as WPD (e.g., they have basically the
>>>> same page names as we do); this means you'll have to collect this data
>>>> via MDN's API;
>>>> 2) Supplement that baseline data with CanIUse and HTML5Test data
>>>> where there is an equivalent feature name (e.g. "border-radius");
>>>> we'll have to wait for QuirksMode and MobileHTML5 data until we have
>>>> the source for that, but we will launch an "explainer" page that tells
>>>> about all our data sources and our timeline.
>>>> Does this seem like a doable approach?
>>>> Regards-
>>>> -Doug
>>>> On 10/23/13 9:24 PM, Julee wrote:
>>>>> Thanks much, Ronald! And everyone who is sharing their data as is!
>>>>> I've sent feelers out regarding a work space in London next week.
>>>>> Will let
>>>>> you know if I hear anything.
>>>>> In the meantime, do you have a sense of how long it might take to
>>>>> normalize this phase-1 data? No biggie, just looking to fill out the
>>>>> CSS-properties schedule.
>>>>> Regards!
>>>>> Julee
>>>>> ----------------------------
>>>>> julee@adobe.com
>>>>> @adobejulee
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Ronald Mansveld <ronald@ronaldmansveld.nl>
>>>>> Date: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 3:47 PM
>>>>> To: Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>
>>>>> Cc: Niels Leenheer <info@html5test.com>, julee <julee@adobe.com>,
>>>>> "public-webplatform-tests@w3.org" <public-webplatform-tests@w3.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: WebPlatform Browser Support phased approach?
>>>>>> Alex Komoroske schreef op 2013-10-22 17:48:
>>>>>>> I strongly support a phased approach. I'm very excited about the
>>>>>>> prospect of having a more robust system set up, but as far as the
>>>>>>> CSS
>>>>>>> Properties launch goes, it's more important to have _something_,
>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>> if it's just a one-time import from a couple of sources.
>>>>>> I feel like there is support to do a phased approach, plus we have
>>>>>> access to a (basic) set of data to get started. Coupled with the
>>>>>> urgency
>>>>>> to get CSS live (which I absolutely support, we've been in alpha
>>>>>> long
>>>>>> enough now ;) ), I think this is indeed the right path to follow.
>>>>>> Plus,
>>>>>> this buys us time to come up with a good plan and schemata for the
>>>>>> data-exchange we want to use in the future.
>>>>>> Next week I'll be in London, if anyone knows a place to work for me
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> can start building the first scripts to parse the data. I've checked
>>>>>> out
>>>>>> the Mozilla Open Office, but to me it's pretty unclear whether that
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> still in use, and if so: if and how I can use it. Do we have any
>>>>>> Mozilla-employees on the list? Or do we have Googlers that know if
>>>>>> perhaps the Google office can be used? Or any Londoners that know of
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> place?
>>>>>> Worst case scenario I think I can use the City Business Library, but
>>>>>> my
>>>>>> experience is that libraries are not always the best place to work
>>>>>> from,
>>>>>> especially not if you try to make full office hours.
>>>>>> Ronald

Received on Thursday, 31 October 2013 10:30:11 UTC