[whatwg] RE: Degrading of web applications

Chris Were chris.were at gmail.com
Thu Sep 9 16:44:21 PDT 2004


> >>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.

Chris



More information about the whatwg mailing list