devicemap-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Werner Keil <>
Subject Re: Werner's Roma slides (was: 2.0 reference client)
Date Mon, 03 Aug 2015 15:47:23 GMT
As mentioned the information is scattered across at least 3-4 other pages,
especially a mandatory comparision that shows almost every available
alternative to DeviceMap.,

Those benchmarks are also old as you can see from the pictures. They are
still representative for the W3C DDR Simple API implementation and being
based on the last ever "open" WURFL snapshot, it may be hard to find that
(except what you rescued on GitHub) so the publicly visible WURFL version
is also as it was in 2011 and unless they provide transparent benchmarks,
there is nothing to compare out in the open any more.

At least Eberhard spoke about some "fantastic performance results" being up
to 100x faster than WURFL but so fsar I never saw any figures, so that's no
proper replacement and simply saying it on a slide would not be better than
existing statements about WURFL. As it should be obvious, the "wall"
metaphor simply came with the whole "DDR" CI also found on other pages.

More than happy to include other pages either based on sustainable
benchmarks we can reproduce or ideas and reference clients towards the
JSON/2.0 direction.
I expect ACE 2015 will update its template, at least for the date on the
front page compared to
There were "filler" pages in that template I'd certainly use again if it is
provided in a similar way. The "History" section seems quite suitable to
some pages like "What was contributed" and especially compared to the Nov
'14 ones in Budapest, what was "Outlook" there e.g. graduating is now
already "History", too ;-)

On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <>

> Hi,
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Werner Keil <> wrote:
> > ...As offered earlier, everyone, whether they can make it to my session
> in
> > Budapest or not is welcome to propose new/changed pages based on the most
> > recent slides from Rome:
> > ...
> As I have already stated, I find the wurfl bashing in there
> unnecessary, especially with the war/wall metaphor.
> Showing facts about other projects is fine (like your benchmarks,
> provided that they are reproducible) but bashing for the sake of it is
> not how Apache projects are supposed to operate.
> -Bertrand

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message