Category Archives: greatest-hits

HTML5 App Stores don’t go too far enough

tl;dr - HTML5 app stores don't leverage the web as much as we should.

Futurama Political Debate

 I'm convinced that packaging HTML5 apps for stores is emulating failure. There are lots of reactions. Among the comments here, Les made the opposite assertion of mine - "where app stores win over plain old URLs is discoverability. ... URLs are precise, but they’re sharp and pokey for most people to handle."

HTML5 App search engine > Pokey URLs

Les made his own counter-point that we fixed pokey URL's with search engines. So, do we need "a special case search engine where the results are constrained [to HTML5 apps]"?


The "webby" approach is to crawl the web to build an index of all app manifests. But how can we discover the manifests? None of the HTML5 app stores document a way to hyperlink manifests.

But maybe we can use SoftwareApplication type, with its convenient installUrl property. We can even use the WebApplication sub-type's 'browserRequirements' property to designate a Firefox, Chrome, or W3C manifest. So Incredible Pizza could expose their HTML5 app like so:

<div itemscope itemtype="">
  <a itemprop="installUrl" href=""><span itemprop="name">Incredible Pizza</span> for <span itemprop="browserRequirements">Firefox</span></a>
  <a itemprop="installUrl" href=""><span itemprop="name">Incredible Pizza</span> for <span itemprop="browserRequirements">Chrome</span></a>
  <a itemprop="installUrl" href=""><span itemprop="name">Incredible Pizza</span> for <span itemprop="browserRequirements">Opera, Windows Phone</span></a>

Voilà. We have web technology to make an HTML5 App search engine. But why are HTML5 app stores making developers manually submit manifest URLs to directories when we could leverage hyperlinks - the central nervous system of the web? As a bonus, a hyperlink-fueled HTML5 app search engine is complimentary to existing mobile platforms. This could be nice:

iOS App Search mockup

Apps contextualize content

Still, an HTML5 app search engine doesn't leverage the web as much as we could. Ambrose Little suggests "discoverability is worse [on the web] because it’s not just apps, it is all kinds of content, much of which is not pertinent nor optimized for your device." This gets to the crux of the issue: outside of pure experience apps like games, when we say we want apps, what we really want is relevant, contextual, optimized content on our mobile devices. Can we deliver relevant, contextual, optimized content to mobile devices without apps?

In Programming the Mobile Web, Maximiliano Firtman touches on this in his chapter about geolocation:

One of the great features of mobile devices is that they can go everywhere with us. That is why the where is very important context to be considered by our websites. Knowing the user's location can help us to show useful contextual information -Firtman

Geolocation is a great place to start, since it's so widely supported on existing mobile browsers. I suggested that could return location-specific content using a captive wifi portal or geolocation. But fuzzy search can also deliver location-specific content, as Google Maps does; though it could be improved to deep-link into a domains' pages with something like GeoURL or a geofenced sitemap.

I.e., if added:

<meta name="geo.position" content="36.05877;-95.8831" />
<meta name="ICBM" content="36.05877, -95.8831" />

to their Tulsa store location page, and maybe add a geo point and radius to their sitemap:

<url xmlns:geo="">

mobile search could do something like this:

iOS Search for Pizza

Search already works

We can search for a pizza place nearby. So what? Foursquare already does that.

But do we have to search for it? As predicted by Mike Masnick back during Yahoo's misguided deal with Microsoft in 2009, "People are discovering that information finds them, rather than them going in search of information. Search already works. The next interesting challenge is in improving the way information finds you, rather than the way you find information."

Improving the way information finds you is how social competes with search, and it's the way mobile web should compete with app stores. Location, time, personal information, preferences, friends, actions - all of these create the context in which information should find us. Chris Cox from Facebook summed it up:

[Mobile phones] should be contextually aware. Check-in to flights, find deals at grocery stores, etc. These things take a bunch of clicks now — it’s all wasting time. The phone should know what we want.

My phone should know:

  1. I have 2 kids under the age of 4
  2. We're near south Tulsa
  3. We typically eat out on Tuesday nights
  4. It's almost dinner-time

It should query the web. To which replies:

  1. Kids 3 and under eat free
  2. We're located in south Tulsa
  3. We have double-play-points specials on Tuesdays and my phone inform me automatically. This touches semantic web stuff; and maybe that's something we mobile web developers should be touching. Because ...

The only group who can contextualize everything is everyone

The web will obsolete app stores ... again. In Scott Jenson's "Why Mobile Apps Must Die" talk at BDConf 2011, he longs for a web-based phone, and a discovery service that helps us find the right needles in the needle-stack of connected things. He calls it "a baby step towards this idea of doing just-in-time interaction" and says "I can guarantee you this will not happen thru apps."

Why not?

Christian reminds us of Yahoo's first (failed) attempt at re-creating a categorized directory of the web. If you don't have time to read Clay Shirky's classic perspective on ontology at least watch this great related 5-minute video:

Even if you skipped both, here's the crux of the matter (emphasis mine):

Yahoo ... added the shelf back. ... The charitable explanation for this is that they thought of this ... as their job, and as something their users would value. The uncharitable explanation is that they thought there was business value in determining the view the user would have to adopt to use the system. Both of those explanations may have been true at different times and in different measures, but the effect was to override the users' sense of where things ought to be, and to insist on the Yahoo view instead.

You can replace "Yahoo" with "Apple" in the preceding statement and it mirrors the current situation of Apps. The web out-grew Yahoo's shelf; it will out-grow Apple's, Google's, Microsoft's, and Mozilla's shelves. Our sense of where things ought to be and how things ought to find us is better than any vendor's. "The web is going to win again. The web always wins." as Johnath says.

The web will win sooner if we spend less time on the shelves and more time delivering relevant, contextual, optimized content to mobile devices.

Packaged HTML5 Apps: Are we emulating failure?

tl;dr - URLs delivered a better experience than native desktop apps; they can do the same for mobile apps.

update: see my follow-up post - HTML5 App Stores don't go too far enough.

HTML5 in a box

When we discussed Sencha's Fastbook app on the mozilla.engagement.developers list Robert pointed out that Sencha compared their HTML5 app running in mobile web browser to Facebook's HTML5 app running in an iOS WebView - the way Sencha & PhoneGap packaged HTML5 apps actually run. It's widely discussed, as we did with Fastbook, that HTML5 apps perform worse in iOS UIWebView than iOS Safari. There are similar stories about Android WebView performance, and Tulsa Web Dev and HTML5 PhoneGap developer Rod just posted a similar performance-related anecdote about BlackBerry WebWorks.

That made me think, "PhoneGap is just that - a stop-gap." ... "we should drop this whole PhoneGap App nonsense and go (back) to mobile web at simple URL's" since:

  1. App discover-ability & installation sucks
  2. App content discover-ability sucks

App discover-ability & installation sucks

A couple months ago, my wife and I took our daughters to Incredible Pizza. When we sat down, I saw this table-tent:

Incredible Pizza Table-Tent

I spent a couple minutes trying to make this "check-in" UX work on my wife's phone. The table-tent literally reads: "TIP: A QR-Reader App is necessary to scan QR codes. There are several free ones available. Check your app store." So, here's what I did to find an app:

  1. Connect to Incredible Pizza wifi
  2. Tap "All apps"
  3. Swipe down to "Play Store"
  4. Tap "Play Store"
  5. Tap "Search"
  6. Type "qr reader"
  7. Swipe thru a huge list of apps
  8. Pick one at random (*)
  9. Tap "Install"
  10. Tap "Accept & Download"
  11. Wait for download & install

Android prompts me with a wall of permissions that I have to accept in order to install the app. And because app updates with new permissions can't be automatically downloaded & installed, many app developers just make their app request all permissions.

* Especially interesting to developers - I picked a free qr reader app at random, verifying that App Stores are more like casinos than gold-mines.

Content discover-ability sucks

Once I had the QR reader app, I started to use it to check-in to Incredible Pizza on Facebook:

  1. Hold the phone in front of the card
  2. Tap "Visit Link"
  3. Tap "Browser"
  4. Go thru 5 redirects to a prompt to open native Facebook app
  5. Facebook opens
  6. Wonder: "Why am I trying to do this in the first place?"

There was no human-readable URL on the card. I had to choose between "Browser" and "VZ Navigator" that came with the phone from Verizon. The redirects took about 20 seconds. Finally, since they don't deep link into the native app, I ultimately end up just staring at the Facebook app as if I'd opened it myself - nothing there at all about Incredible Pizza.

This totally obscures the app's content, and value, from the user. If I package my HTML5 app with PhoneGap I have to also register a custom URL scheme to link to a specific part of it - something PhoneGap doesn't help you to do(?). And even when you do it, you will need to make and deploy an update to the app anytime you want to add new URL-driven logic to it, invoking another round of app review.

The Plain Old URL approach

Contrast the above experience with a more traditional web approach:

  1. Connect to Incredible Pizza wifi
  2. Tap Browser
  3. (Maybe) Type ""
  4. (Maybe) Tap "Yes" at a geolocation prompt

Incredible Pizza could immediately give me the store-specific web page via captive wifi portal with big buttons for location-and-date-specific coupons, facebook check-in, etc. Or, if I'm not on their wifi, I type "" to get the same thing via geolocation. In addition to a simpler experience, deploying new or updated content is as simple as updating the website.

So why package HTML5 apps?

Considering all the above, I usually ask web devs using PhoneGap: "Why are you using PhoneGap instead of just putting an HTML5 app at a URL?" and they often reply "everyone wants an app." This "everyone wants an app" situation is a problem we developers and designers should address - but not just technically. We should work with our clients and customers to consider the full user experience of native vs. web - especially app installation & content discover-ability.

... although many brands and creative agencies believe that they need to develop iPhone apps, what they need in reality is a good mobile site. It costs less to develop, manage and work across all handsets.

- HTML5 - The End of Apps | Mobile Europe

If you're making an HTML5 app, consider - do you want to make a native desktop application? Why or why not? Then consider if the same reasoning is true for the native mobile application. Consider the URL experience for your customers. Walk your clients thru both native app and URL experiences on mobile devices. We used web URLs to deliver a better experience than native desktop apps - we should do the same with mobile apps.

Good HTML5 Packaging - URL Bookmarks

Vendors like Mozilla (disclaimer: my employer) and Google are also working on manifests to install HTML5 apps on Firefox (OS) and Chrome (OS). Opera and previously(?) Microsoft (via Silverlight) use the W3C Packaged Web Apps (Widgets) standard. I like these efforts if they contribute towards a consistent "installation" experience that works more like an enhanced bookmark. I.e., turn this:

  1. Visit URL
  2. Tap "Add to ..."
  3. Tap "Add to Home Screen"
  4. Tap "Add"

into this:

  1. Visit URL
  2. Tap "Add to Home Screen."

But next time you make an app, consider the tried-and-true web experience:

  1. Tap Browser
  2. Type URL

Facebook never bet on HTML5

I'm going to jump into the mix, but my post is short and sweet. In fact, I wrote it while waiting for tests to run.

Facebook never bet on HTML5. Anyone remember the convoluted rambling of Dave Fetterman at f8 developer conference last year? I remember being both dumbfounded and confounded by it.

So, how does this work? Project FaceWeb is an extension of this progressive enhancement idea. So, instead of the phone saying I am rendering for a WebKit browser, we send an agent that says you are going to be rendering for a WebKit UI WebKit view inside the iPhone app. So, what you have to do is detect that, style a Web code to make that work, build a bridge between the things that you want to write to interact natively with the Objective-C, say in Javascript, then build HTML pages for Facebook in the iPhone. So, you build much smaller native goop instead of having to build over and over again.


HTML5 is probably the way that we should have done it.

Near as I can tell, Facebook invented their own PhoneGap (i.e., FaceWeb) and sent to it, then FaceWeb changed webkit's rendering logic* to match instead of changing to a mobile HTML5 site? That's not HTML5 - that's just stupid.

* UPDATE: as pointed out in comments, this isn't exactly accurate. Faceweb does some funky stuff though, and their engineering manager in charge of the project couldn't even articulate what it is. So it still sounds like bad engineering unrelated to HTML5.

* UPDATE 2: You should read Matt Asay's analysis of Facebook's HTML5 fiasco. In fact, you should read everything Matt Asay writes.

Beer & Tech Community Events

Disclaimer: I like beer. I read about beer. I make my own beer. I even go to a Benedictine Abbey once a month to brew beer with monks.

Chris shared Ryan Funduk's post describing the tech community's enthusiasm for alcohol that implicitly, and sometimes explicitly, excludes non-drinkers. Ryan makes a keen insight that deserves wider consideration - that the alcohol "fun gamut" attracts brogrammers.

Obviously, "brogrammers" aren't the only ones in our community who enjoy alcohol. Ryan correctly points out that drinking is widespread, yet "brogrammers" are, thankfully, a small though obnoxious minority. So we can ask bigger questions - What is it about alcohol that we like? What does it do to us? Then finally, how should we incorporate it into community events?

What is it about CH3CH2OH that we like?

Science!Alcohol directly affects the prefrontal cortex responsible for judgement and inhibition by prolonging the opening of chloride ion channels which floods post-synaptic cells with chloride ions so the cells cannot as readily respond to stimuli. Alcohol also inhibits dopamine breakdown which extends our dopamine system's pleasure sensations. Alcohol acts as a sedative on our entire central nervous system.[1]

Our brains need some R&R -  All of this can be especially relaxing for people (like developers?) who are constantly exercising their central nervous system; the prefrontal cortex is particularly believed to work on complex cognitive behavior like solving abstract problems. No wonder we like to give it a rest!

Alcohol is an identity microscope

True SelfAs we relax our prefrontal cortex, we also lose inhibitions and judgement.

A couple years ago I discussed this from a Christian perspective with my theology professors (over a couple pints of beer, of course!). Drinking alcohol ranges from religiously required (as in my Catholic tradition!) to socially taboo (in some mainline Evangelical traditions) to religiously forbidden (in Mormon and some fundamentalist traditions) among Christian worldviews. So, we covered lots of angles. I left with an opinion that as alcohol lowers our inhibitions, we can somewhat discover how much of our faith is just inhibitory religious codes, and how much we are actually allowing our "true selves" (as Thomas Merton calls it) to be transformed to the life of Jesus.

It's not just a religious thing. We all know "sloppy drunks", "mean drunks", "emotional drunks", "tired drunks", etc. But alcohol doesn't make us mean or angry or sexist or emotional - alcohol removes other inhibitions we pile on top of those parts of ourselves. So here's the point - if I make a sexist comment while intoxicated, I'm sexist. (For whatever definition of 'sexist' we use.) If I'm sexist, that's something I need to change, regardless of alcohol consumption.

We need to improve as a community in lots of ways, with or without alcohol.

Can we put alcohol on the same level as caffeine?

Since I'm only making my rough observations and opinions, I don't have any specific suggestions for how we should handle alcohol at tech community events. Ryan makes some good ones in his post, there's a decent little discussion going on in Mozilla's engagement-developers list, and Rob gives some good general advice.

I very much agree with Ryan and Rob. I'd like to see alcohol as one entertainment among many at technology events. It can be an aspect of any event, but shouldn't ever be the main aspect of any event. I personally will always go check out the craft and local beers available at any event. (I make a habit to try to visit a brewery and a cathedral anytime I travel.)

But what I really want at these events, and what happens the vast majority of the time, even the "party" events, is to mingle with others who are passionate about technology - no matter what drink they're holding.


Bugzilla is cute but deadly.I'm not a pure Agilista™ but we're always trying to improve our development process for MDN. John and I like Scrum and XP stuff, but every team does Agile™ a little differently - as they should. A while back we shopped around for tracker tools and stuck (as Mozillians always do) with bugzilla. We - i.e., mostly John and Jay - also looked at acunote, planbox, scrumdo, agilezen, pivotal, and agilebench.

What we most like about Bugzilla:

  • Bugzilla is Mozillian - it channels the work of tens of thousands of Mozillians; we can cc anyone in the community on a bug
  • Bugzilla is open - we can link anyone in the world to a bug
  • Bugzilla is versatile - as Jonath says in Bugzilla for Humans, it's the devil we know

On the latter point, I've forked some agile features onto Greg's BugzillaJS to help us work more Scrummy™. Our most pressing issue is managing releases - our scope keeps bloating and our releases keep slipping. So we're starting to use the Agile/XP concept of "points" to estimate bugs, track our team velocity, and hopefully improve our release rhythm and reliability. Behold our improved "sprint backlog":

MDN™ 0.9.9 Sprint™ Backlog™

There's a few new things going on here. Here's a summary of how we're doing what we're doing:

Bugzilla Agile Target Milestone
Milestone releases - We use the milestone field of bugzilla for our releases. Next up is 0.9.9 scheduled for August 2nd release. As we move to a more continuous development and release cycle, the milestone version numbers lose meaning (just like Firefox), but we want to track releases. (Sorry James, we're not deploying every check-in just yet).

Bugzilla Whiteboard
Whiteboard overloading - We're using a tag=value pattern in the whiteboard to add new "fields" because adding fields and values to bugzilla requires IT changes and they're over-worked as it is. In our case,

  • 'u' - the primary user of the feature/bug (faster and more programmable than writing "As a ___, I want ___" every time
  • 'c' - the component that the feature/bug modifies
  • 'p' - points

bugzilla agile story points

Calculating points and stories - For any search that includes the "whiteboard" column with the specified tokens, the addon sums the number of "Open" and "Closed" stories and points for the release.

MDN Components Graph
Pretty graphs - data visualization FTW. Seriously, graphs give us a quick snapshot of the open v. closed bugs, and in which component we're spending our effort. This is important for MDN because we want to re-write the wiki while continuing to deploy site enhancements and changes. Now we can see exactly how much of our effort is going to the wiki as compared to other components.

I really hope this improves our releases and makes life easier for devs. Points by release and components are our most pressing needs so we can set realistic release and product expectations, and keep ourselves honest about where we're spending our effort. We'll probably add velocity and burndown charts once we finish a few point-based releases.

If anyone else wants to use it, my fork of BugzillaJS is up on github; download the .xpi file and open it with Firefox to install the addon. Feedback and pull requests are very welcome!

Edit: I should point out we're inspired by other agile Bugzilla tools - the Songbird team has wrestled bugzilla into their Agile process, and fligtar created moxie to help AMO product management.