On 2016-03-17 07:12, Richard Maher wrote:
>> An even more powerful (but also ignored possibility) would be
COMBINING the power
>> of the Web and App worlds instead of fighting religious wars ("the
Web
is great"),
>> where there are no winners, only lost opportunities.
>
> That's what plugins were for wan't it? And I still cry every night
over
the death of Applets :-(
> (A single mutliplexed (static) TCP/IP full-duplex connection per
user-agent!)
Plugins were deprecated which (IMO) was OK since they had serious
security issues, what's
less satisfactory is removing features without consider some kind of
reasonable replacement.
Several other somewhat related features are currently also subject to
removal/deprecation.
>> It gets worse...if you are the Web tech leader then you are
apparently
free taking
>> this "shortcut" (some people would rather characterize this as an
intelligent use
>> of available resources and competences), and get away with it as
well:
>> https://github.com/w3c/webpayments/issues/42#issuecomment-166705416
>
> C'mon Anders, do you blame them?
Well, Google more or less wrote the "Grand Plan" and now they are
defecting from it,
while leaving everybody else with the old (non-working) plan and
_severely_disadvantaged_.
> Faced with the intractability, self-interest, and narcissism
surrounding
> the IOC^h^h^hW3C Gordian knot, are you really surprised that
someone
owning
> the implementation will pull out their sword and opt for results
over
process?
I (naively) thought that maybe _somebody_else_ (with more influence
than a
non-member like me), would be interested in taking a closer look at
this
powerful capability. I only seek a constructive discussion on what to
do
now.
Anders
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Anders Rundgren <
anders.rundgren....@gmail.com <mailto:anders.rundgren....@gmail.com>>
wrote:
>
> On 2016-03-17 06:00, Richard Maher wrote:
>
> Hi Patrick (Congratulations on today) Technical Point
follows: -
>
> On a merit-based resource allocation basis, the two most
fundamental, essential,
>
> > and absolutely necessary HTML5 Web-App feature enhancements
are: -
>
>
> 1) Background GPS device/user tracking support
> 2) Push API 1:M broadcast capability
>
> These are enabling technologies that will catapult HTML5 Web
Apps into the
>
> > Native App heartland and single-handedly alter the
development-tool and deployment
> > strategies for Mobile App vendors around the world.
>
> An even more powerful (but also ignored possibility) would be
COMBINING the power
> of the Web and App worlds instead of fighting religious wars
("the
Web is great"),
> where there are no winners, only lost opportunities.
>
> It gets worse...if you are the Web tech leader then you are
apparently free taking
> this "shortcut" (some people would rather characterize this as an
intelligent use
> of available resources and competences), and get away with it as
well:
>
https://github.com/w3c/webpayments/issues/42#issuecomment-166705416
>
> Anders
>
>
> The reason these features do not appear on the W3C horizon is
that they show-case online-first and are anathema to the Offline-First
Mafia that is currently setting the agenda and feathering its own nest.
>
> Technically, I have to admit to having absolutely no idea
how a
W3C performance review would be conducted or how ROI on a given
contributor's input could be measured. I am a simple man who just
needs a
couple more tools in the box in order to deliver the killer Web Apps my
users are begging for.
>
> Where I come from, and certainly from my experience in London
finance, it's all about getting the job done! You can have two heads
and be
the most obnoxious Maher in the world but you're paid to do a job and
get
around the Sir Humphrey Appleby speed humps on the road the progress in
order to do it.
>
> I'm not here to make friends or see how many followers I can
get on Twitter, and I apologize for being the only one without an
original
selfie of myself looking wistfully off camera, but I'm motivated by
results
and not married to the process.
>
> HTML5 - Web Apps "The journey is *NOT* the destination!
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <
re...@splintered.co.uk <mailto:re...@splintered.co.uk> <mailto:
re...@splintered.co.uk <mailto:re...@splintered.co.uk>>> wrote:
>
> On 16/03/2016 04:46, Richard Maher wrote:
> ...
>
> Anyway, if the decorum police will agree to stay
their
truncheons for a
> moment longer and indulge my use of satire, parody,
and metaphor, in
> making an extremely valid technical point,
>
> ...
>
> Or you could just make your valid technical point,
without
resorting to your sarcastic tone which, frankly, is quite grating and
is
doing you no favors in getting at least some of the readership on this
list to even want to engage in your argument.
>
> P
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
>
> www.splintered.co.uk <http://www.splintered.co.uk> <
http://www.splintered.co.uk> | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>
>
>
>
