ISSUE-5: Should we be perscriptive on documenting different content architectures (eg use of middleware) in the recommendations document?
Should we be perscriptive on documenting different content architectures (eg use of middleware) in the recommendations document?
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Best Practices Document
- Raised by:
- Daniel Appelquist
- Opened on:
- 2005-08-18
- Description:
- e.g. is using a middleware something that can be required in our best practices
- Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- [minutes] Summary of F2F meeting (from dom@w3.org on 2005-10-12)
- Re: Making it clear that adaptation is not mandatory (from dom@w3.org on 2005-09-23)
- RE: [agenda] Thusrday September 15 (from paul.walsh@segalamtest.com on 2005-09-15)
- [agenda] Thusrday September 15 (from dom@w3.org on 2005-09-14)
- Re: [agenda] Thusrday September 15 (from parcher@icra.org on 2005-09-14)
- RE: [agenda] Thusrday September 15 (from gaaron@afilias.info on 2005-09-14)
- RE: [agenda] BPWG Teleconf Thu Sep 1st (from paul.walsh@segalamtest.com on 2005-09-01)
- [agenda] BPWG Teleconf Thu Sep 1st (from dom@w3.org on 2005-08-31)
- RE: [agenda] BPWG Teleconf Thu Aug 25 (from Daniel.Appelquist@vodafone.com on 2005-08-25)
- [agenda] BPWG Teleconf Thu Aug 25 (from dom@w3.org on 2005-08-24)
- ISSUE-5: Should we be perscriptive on documenting different content architectures (eg use of middleware) in the recommendations document? (from dean+cgi@w3.org on 2005-08-18)
- [minutes] Teleconference Aug 18 (from dom@w3.org on 2005-08-18)
Related notes:
RESOLUTION: the Best Practices do not require use of content adaptation, but
that it is likely that a better user experience will be acheived on a wider
range of devices if it is used - Luca dissents
Display change log
