On Sep 14, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Warren Baird wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Alexey Khoroshilov
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> let's leave UX profiles out of the consideration for now
> 
> Hmm - that raises something that doesn't seem to be covered by the
> spec --- does a 'MeeGo Compliant App' have to run well on *all* UX's?
> 
> That could be a lot of work for some apps - anything designed
> specifically for netbooks for instance might not work on a Handset or
> Vehicle UX without a lot of tweaking.
This is a very good question.

I think we need to enable both "universal" MeeGo applications that run well on 
any device and also vertical-specific applications that are tuned and optimized 
for a specific device category.
> 
> Do we need to have "MeeGo Compliant" - which implies all UX's as well
> as "MeeGo NetBook Compliant" / "MeeGo HandSet Compliant", etc?
Consistent with the idea of device profiles - I think it makes sense to have a 
"Universal MeeGo Application" and "MeeGo Handset App", "MeeGo Netbook App", etc.

-Mark
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Warren
> 
> P.S.   I don't know how many times I've nearly typed "MeeGo Complaint"
> in this thread...
> 
> -- 
> Warren Baird - Photographer and Digital Artist
> http://www.synergisticimages.ca
> _______________________________________________
> MeeGo-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev

_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev

Reply via email to