This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 1045 - Avoiding device-dependent profiles
Summary: Avoiding device-dependent profiles
Status: RESOLVED REMIND
Alias: None
Product: QA
Classification: Unclassified
Component: QASpec-GL (show other bugs)
Version: LC-2004-11-22
Hardware: All All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Karl Dubost
QA Contact: Karl Dubost
URL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-01-21 09:42 UTC by Dominique Hazael-Massieux
Modified: 2005-04-28 11:53 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description Dominique Hazael-Massieux 2005-01-21 09:42:06 UTC
"4.1 Good Practice A: Create subdivisions of the technology when
warranted" -- One additional "technique" I would recommend here is to
avoid profiling device-independent technologies in device-dependent
ways. For example, having mobile profiles for markup languages. Such
profiles will lead to a fragmented Web, as content written for the
full profile will only work on full UAs, and content for smaller
profiles will be written with the assumption that they will only be
used from small devices.

Instead, I would recommend having either just a lowest common
denominator, implementable on all devices, or having optional features
with well-defined fallback behaviour, so that they can be used in all
content with the technology usably interoperable even in
implementations that implement only the required parts.

For example, CSS requires all UAs to implement full RGB color, but on
black-and-white devices the specified colours are then down-sampled to
fit the available hardware.
Comment 1 Karl Dubost 2005-03-03 17:34:11 UTC
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Feb/0021.html

(dh) Do we want to say anything about profiles being related to  
devices, or not?
(kd) We always try to say that the simpler the better (about the  
specification)
(tb) CSS has oral/visual features, for example
(lr) We have a statement indicating subdivision, on this point we need  
more information
(kd) I take the action item, since I've replied to his messages
Comment 2 Dominique Hazael-Massieux 2005-03-04 02:16:10 UTC
After further discussion, the WG agreed that the current wording in SpecGL
discouraging variability:
""
Variability, while it can provide for broader usage of the technology, may
impede interoperability.  Watch out for excessive variability  that which goes
beyond what is needed. 
""
http://www.w3.org/QA/Group/2005/02/qaframe-spec/#variability

was enough, and didn't think that getting into the technical details as to what
is good or bad variability could be decided theoretically, but rather should be
carefully evaluated by each Working Group (as expressed in "as warranted".

[Turn this into WontFix once replied to originator]
Comment 3 Dominique Hazael-Massieux 2005-04-28 11:53:52 UTC
setting version to LC in case of future use