You are here. See how this question connects to other ideas.
Select a node to open its page · Expand to read within the map
One question
Can every device render the same interface?
Capability declarations and degradation determine how a structure reaches its target.
A phone, browser, chat window and document need not support identical interactions. AUP describes target capabilities with DeviceCaps. Each primitive can be marked native, webview, partial or unsupported.
These values describe support mode and degree:
| Value | Meaning |
|---|---|
native | The current rendering target directly supports the type; do not infer a particular mobile-native control from the word alone |
webview | Support through Web-content presentation |
partial | A supported subset with target-specific limits |
unsupported | The target does not support the type |
Consider a hypothetical chart: an interactive window lets people manipulate it, while an exported static document can only show a picture or text summary. This illustrates different target needs, not a capability assertion about a particular chart renderer. Here “document target” means a document-rendering target, not every application that can edit documents.
A core primitive belongs to the protocol vocabulary. This does not establish a complete implementation on every device. Whether an interaction degrades to text or a simpler interface depends on existing degradation rules, not an assumed universal fallback.
A useful example identifies what it expresses, where it runs and what that target supports. Verify the actual target before release.
Further reading
Technical documentation: read the full reference.
Check your understanding
Does appearing in the core list prove a type is interactive in documents?
No. Check document capabilities, degradation rules and actual behavior.
Continue along a learning path
- From protocol to siteStep 9 of 9