W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg-ct@w3.org > January 2009

Re: [minutes] CT Call 6 january 2009

From: Tom Hume <Tom.Hume@futureplatforms.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 22:31:20 +0000
Message-Id: <87831BD3-110A-47D6-B039-BF83CA6383BD@futureplatforms.com>
To: public-bpwg-ct <public-bpwg-ct@w3.org>

I don't agree I'm afraid. Looking at Eduardo's stats, at least 99.84%  
of documents are XHTML but not advertised as such. This leaves 0.16%  
of sites as XHTML and advertised as such.

Combine with NetCrafts figures of and that's just shy of 300,000 sites  
- a pretty significant number to discount, even if a small proportion  
of the overall web IMHO.

On 7 Jan 2009, at 22:20, Luca Passani wrote:

> I'll try to find some data. But do we agree that if less than 1% of  
> full-web-only adopt xml+xhtml as a MIME type, then we can call xhtml 
> +xml an absolute heuristic for detecting mobile sites?
>
> (of course, I still believe that those sites are way less than 1% of  
> the full web, but I say 1% to leave some margin for error in the  
> unlikely event  that whoever collected the stats found two or three  
> of those sites out of a pool of only a few hundreds)

--
Future Platforms Ltd
e: Tom.Hume@futureplatforms.com
t: +44 (0) 1273 819038
m: +44 (0) 7971 781422
company: www.futureplatforms.com
personal: tomhume.org
Received on Wednesday, 7 January 2009 22:31:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 January 2009 22:31:59 GMT