Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-20 Thread Richard Maher
Nick, while we're waiting for Léonie to lecture you on
participation-criteria,  etiquette, and social competence, let me call on
the late, great, Rodney Dangerfield to proxy my response: -

*Judge Smails*: You have worn out your welcome, sir!
*Czervik*: Is that so? Who made you Pope of this dump?
*Judge Smails*: Bushwood...a "dump"? Well, I'll guarantee you'll never be a
member here!
*Czervik*: Are you kidding? You think I'd join this crummy "snobatorium"?
Why, this whole place sucks!

Now that I think about it I haven't come across a black face here yet, very
few females, and not many Jewish names. Maybe it's still "too soon" for
Reformation references in the W3C Country Club? (BTW. On the FTF-jolly
stakes the IETF Club kicks your arse with Honolulu and Yokohama versus your
Sapporo and Lisbon.)

> Fresh start? If you make a good case, without calling the w3c a mafia,
people might actually engage this more seriously.

Rest assured, I am pulling out of these forums. (I'm just happy to know
that a softer gentler place continues to exist somewhere)

I've found someone who has more credibility and form here and is willing to
take the idea forward. Background GeoLocation was a massive issue before I
pinned my colours too it and is too important to the HTML5 Web App future
to be tarnished by collateral bigotry and prejudice.

But before I go, why do you all look and sound the same?

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:49 PM, Nick Dugger  wrote:

> Listen, you may not be here to make friends, but if you want to incite
> change, you might try playing nicely. If you just want results, you'll have
> greater success without your sarcasm and superiority complex.
>
> Fresh start? If you make a good case, without calling the w3c a mafia,
> people might actually engage this more seriously. As of right now, I can't
> speak for everyone, but I definitely don't like your tone.
>
> Thanks,
> Nick Dugger
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016, 1:52 AM Anders Rundgren <
> anders.rundgren@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 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 >
>> 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 

Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-20 Thread Nick Dugger
Listen, you may not be here to make friends, but if you want to incite
change, you might try playing nicely. If you just want results, you'll have
greater success without your sarcasm and superiority complex.

Fresh start? If you make a good case, without calling the w3c a mafia,
people might actually engage this more seriously. As of right now, I can't
speak for everyone, but I definitely don't like your tone.

Thanks,
Nick Dugger

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016, 1:52 AM Anders Rundgren 
wrote:

> 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 >
> 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 

Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-20 Thread Patrick H. Lauke

On 18/03/2016 03:52, Richard Maher wrote:

I've found someone who has more credibility and form here and is willing
to take the idea forward.


Let's hope that someone also understands what it means to make a 
technical argument, without resorting to some House of Commons Tory 
Obxbridge debating style with thinly veiled ad-hominems.


https://twitter.com/JoeSondow/status/692170578023862273

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke

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



Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-19 Thread Nick Dugger
> Nick, while we're waiting for Léonie to lecture you
on participation-criteria,  etiquette, and social competence [...]

That was actually my very first message on any of these mailing lists, so
it was manually approved by a moderator. I'm very confused about how you
think I broke etiquette and you did not? This whole thread could be the
poster child of how not to engage with other people.

Thanks,
Nick Dugger

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016, 4:48 AM Patrick H. Lauke 
wrote:

> On 18/03/2016 03:52, Richard Maher wrote:
> > I've found someone who has more credibility and form here and is willing
> > to take the idea forward.
>
> Let's hope that someone also understands what it means to make a
> technical argument, without resorting to some House of Commons Tory
> Obxbridge debating style with thinly veiled ad-hominems.
>
> https://twitter.com/JoeSondow/status/692170578023862273
>
> P
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
>
> 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
>
>


Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-19 Thread Anders Rundgren

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 > 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  >> 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.


Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-19 Thread Richard Maher
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.

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 
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 | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>
>


Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-19 Thread Michiel Bijl

> On 18 Mar 2016, at 04:52, Richard Maher  wrote:
> 
> Nick, while we're waiting for Léonie to lecture you on 
> participation-criteria,  etiquette, and social competence, let me call on the 
> late, great, Rodney Dangerfield to proxy my response: -

Could you please adjust your attitude towards members of this working group? We 
are here to improve the web, not to insult people. 

Thank you. 
—Michiel

Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-18 Thread Chaals McCathie Nevile
The chairs and various individuals requested that Mr Maher use a tone  
acceptable in this group.


This email once again fails to meet the minimum standards of politeness  
and constructive behaviour for this group.


Mr Maher has been removed from the mailing list.

for the chairs

chaals

On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 04:52:27 +0100, Richard Maher 
wrote:


Nick, while we're waiting for Léonie to lecture you on
participation-criteria,  etiquette, and social competence, let me call on
the late, great, Rodney Dangerfield to proxy my response: -

*Judge Smails*: You have worn out your welcome, sir!
*Czervik*: Is that so? Who made you Pope of this dump?
*Judge Smails*: Bushwood...a "dump"? Well, I'll guarantee you'll never  
be a

member here!
*Czervik*: Are you kidding? You think I'd join this crummy "snobatorium"?
Why, this whole place sucks!

Now that I think about it I haven't come across a black face here yet,  
very

few females, and not many Jewish names. Maybe it's still "too soon" for
Reformation references in the W3C Country Club? (BTW. On the FTF-jolly
stakes the IETF Club kicks your arse with Honolulu and Yokohama versus  
your

Sapporo and Lisbon.)


Fresh start? If you make a good case, without calling the w3c a mafia,

people might actually engage this more seriously.

Rest assured, I am pulling out of these forums. (I'm just happy to know
that a softer gentler place continues to exist somewhere)

I've found someone who has more credibility and form here and is willing  
to
take the idea forward. Background GeoLocation was a massive issue before  
I

pinned my colours too it and is too important to the HTML5 Web App future
to be tarnished by collateral bigotry and prejudice.

But before I go, why do you all look and sound the same?

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:49 PM, Nick Dugger   
wrote:



Listen, you may not be here to make friends, but if you want to incite
change, you might try playing nicely. If you just want results, you'll  
have

greater success without your sarcasm and superiority complex.

Fresh start? If you make a good case, without calling the w3c a mafia,
people might actually engage this more seriously. As of right now, I  
can't

speak for everyone, but I definitely don't like your tone.

Thanks,
Nick Dugger

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016, 1:52 AM Anders Rundgren <
anders.rundgren@gmail.com> wrote:


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 >
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 

Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-18 Thread Richard Maher
> 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!)

> 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?

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?


On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Anders Rundgren <
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 > > 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  |
>> https://github.com/patrickhlauke
>> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
>> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>>
>>
>>
>


Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-18 Thread Anders Rundgren

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 > 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  | 
https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke







Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-16 Thread Patrick H. Lauke

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 | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke



Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-16 Thread Jake Archibald
On Wed, 16 Mar 2016, 04:46 Richard Maher,  wrote:

> Look Jake, your entire argument is premised on the abstract notion that 
> “cached
> data is often fine”. Allow me to respond with an equally unquantifiable
> “EXCEPT WHEN IT BLOODY ISN’T”.
>
>  ...
>
> *The Bud Fox Day-Trader App*
>
> * …*
>
> Wall Street may be closed, you could be going through the Channel Tunnel,
> or you could simply be on the dark side of the moon, but BF Day-Trader will
> let you buy or sell virtually straight from your stock portfolio!
>

I'm not a UX expert, or a trading expert (https://youtu.be/GlcuV_Dojwg),
but here's how I'd unsarcastically approach offline-first in a stocks app:

When the user revisits the site it gets to content-render before a network
response. Prior to connectivity the user can access their trading history,
and the history of entities they "follow".

As soon as cached data is displayed, the UI shows the age of the data and
something to indicate the progress of updating.

Push messages could be used to alert the user to significant changes in the
entities they follow. Once the device receives the push message the cached
data for that entity should be updated, so the full up-to-date data can be
displayed once the user taps the notification, without going to the network.

If the user attempts to make a trade prior to data updating, either
disallow it or show an appropriately severe warning.

Due to the time-sensitivity of making a trade, deferred sending via
background sync isn't appropriate. However, background sync could be used
to alert the user when they next gain connectivity, allowing them to review
changes in the market and decide if they still want to go ahead with the
trade.

Like I said in my previous post, this isn't about offline, it's about
improving the experience for everyone. And note that this isn't a choice
between cached and fresh data, it's both, you transition from one to the
other.


Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-15 Thread Richard Maher
Look Jake, your entire argument is premised on the abstract notion that “cached
data is often fine”. Allow me to respond with an equally unquantifiable
“EXCEPT WHEN IT BLOODY ISN’T”.



I’ve been cutting code for over 30 years and am very familiar with
scenarios where cached data is appropriate and if history is any guide it
tells us that server-level caching is the most effective (especially with
sophistication levels as high as Oracle’s cluster-wide Cache-Fusion). The
Fat-Client pattern came and went 20 years ago as far as I’m concerned but
if you, and others at W3C, are happy to breathe new life into the IBM 3270
[2] architecture by re-implementing it on the Web, then more power to you.
Those like myself who have gotten used to features such a server-hosted
character-by-character predictive-text, real-time banking, and trading, are
loathed to take such an enormous step backwards. You appear to have a
marvelous solution, but I and many others are not experiencing your
perceived problem(s).



The very real problem we are experiencing is the disproportionate resource
and funding allocation from browser vendors toward infrastructure and
functionality targeted at social-media. Not everything is Twitter and Email
for Pete’s sake or, for that matter, an RSS aggregation of this morning’s
newspapers.



Give us background GPS, give us some sort of broadcast/multi-cast Push API
capability without 1:1 notifications, just give us the tools to compete
with native apps and we’ll do the rest!



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, I’d like to introduce to you the latest
Web-App offering from HTML5 Horse-First Laboratories ™ [1]: -



*The Bud Fox Day-Trader App*



The true beauty of this Web App is that it doesn’t matter one iota what
time-zone you’re in as you can always buy and sell at a price that suits
your cache$ [4]



Wall Street may be closed, you could be going through the Channel Tunnel,
or you could simply be on the dark side of the moon, but BF Day-Trader will
let you buy or sell virtually straight from your stock portfolio!



*“But what if the current stock price is different to what I’m seeing and
trading in?” *



This is where Day-Trader shines above all the Native Apps that have to
submit to the laws of physics as well as the governance of the Securities
and Exchange Commission. Your trades don’t happen in real-time either! A
background-sync job will get around to transmitting your trade to the Stock
Exchange as soon as your network usage limits allow. By then the stock
price could well be what you bid for in the first place anyway. How good is
that!



In the words of our Systems Architect [3] “Close enough is good enough!”.



[1] http://images.clipartpanda.com/amish-clipart-68145_134_w11-14_s_lg.gif

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_3270

[3] http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7278/7852694410_b2d8aa034c.jpg

[4]* Cache$ (Uselessness is relative concept)*



Cache$1 - This is the red-hot highly volatile repository for stocks that
you traded in the last week. Memory consumption is critical so less than
100 stocks are resident here and refresh rates can be almost hourly
depending on network availability.



Cache$2 – Overflow from Cache$1 into perpetuity.



IndexDB – At installation time every stock on the planet and last bid is
copied to your phone. Most DBAs will tell you that the best way to
replicate data is “not at all” but tell that to Thurston Howell III. You
just never know when you’ll have to trade from a deserted island.

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:20 PM, Jake Archibald 
wrote:

> On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 at 12:14 Richard Maher  wrote:
>
>> Your willingness, nay preference, to serve up stale, outdated data, is an
>> exercise in self-flagellation that only a fellow sicko could understand
>>
> This is not the intent in the pattern you quote (
> https://jakearchibald.com/2014/offline-cookbook/#cache-then-network).
>
> The goal is to get cached data on screen then update it. This is because
> cached data is often fine as a first pass.
>
> If I'm going to my messaging app to remind me where I agreed to meet
> someone, cached data is fine. If I'm going to my fitness app to find out
> how long it took me to run two miles last week, cached data is fine. If I'm
> looking up the day for my flight, cached data is fine.
>
> But it doesn't stop there. The network is used, if available, to update
> both the content on the screen (in some non-disruptive way) and in the
> cache.
>
> The benefit of having data locally on the device is you don't need an
> internet connection to get it, if you refuse to show it until a network
> request as settled or timed out, you're throwing away the benefit.
>
> The offline-first pattern not only improves things for offline users, it
> improves things for everyone whose connection 

Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

2016-03-15 Thread Jake Archibald
On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 at 12:14 Richard Maher  wrote:

> Your willingness, nay preference, to serve up stale, outdated data, is an
> exercise in self-flagellation that only a fellow sicko could understand
>
This is not the intent in the pattern you quote (
https://jakearchibald.com/2014/offline-cookbook/#cache-then-network).

The goal is to get cached data on screen then update it. This is because
cached data is often fine as a first pass.

If I'm going to my messaging app to remind me where I agreed to meet
someone, cached data is fine. If I'm going to my fitness app to find out
how long it took me to run two miles last week, cached data is fine. If I'm
looking up the day for my flight, cached data is fine.

But it doesn't stop there. The network is used, if available, to update
both the content on the screen (in some non-disruptive way) and in the
cache.

The benefit of having data locally on the device is you don't need an
internet connection to get it, if you refuse to show it until a network
request as settled or timed out, you're throwing away the benefit.

The offline-first pattern not only improves things for offline users, it
improves things for everyone whose connection to the internet is slower
than their device's storage.