W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > September 2004

[whatwg] RE: Degrading of web applications

From: Chris Were <chris.were@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:14:21 +0930
Message-ID: <35bb4269040909164445db182c@mail.gmail.com>
> >>what you don't explain though is why that
> >> model requires no degradation - what's the difference?
> >
> > Are you refering to future or past degradation? The model I mentioned
> > doesn't require past degradation, but the future WHATWG specification
> > definately requires degradation to continue supporting what is
> > currently possible.
> could you explain more what you mean by future and past degradation?
> This hasn't really made anything clear I'm afraid, but I think you're
> probably right that we're talking at crossed purposes..
By past degradation I mean the ability of current
documents/applications using current standards to degrade nicely to
older browsers.
By future degradation I mean the ability of future
documents/applications using future standards (such as those being
worked on by WHATWG) to degrade nicely to browsers we currently use.

In my original post I was referring to the ability of current web
applications to degrade nicely to older browsers, whereas I believe
you were referring to the ability of future web applications to
degrade nicely to current browsers. This latter capability is
obviously an essential requirement as you mentioned. The point I was
making is that current web applications don't have a requirement to
degrade nicely for older browsers if they're built using technology
only available to the latest browsers.

Hope that clears things up.

Received on Thursday, 9 September 2004 16:44:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:37 UTC