Re: Best Practices document - not best practices

Thanks a lot for your feedback, I will start working on a WML version straight away! 
 
Out of interest, when you say I should support WML for the mass market I take it that there is still  a lot of WML phones out there at the moment? ( you will have to forgive me I have been spoiled by working in Japan where HDML has a tiny coverage ) 
 
Is this something that you think is going to change in the near future when the bandwidth increases ? 
 
Marcus.
http://cellsuite.blogspot.com
 


Ray Anderson <ray@bango.net> wrote:
RSS feeds are becoming a popular "add on " to WAP sites, and a nice way to get lots of content to users.

I noticed that your site did not work on "Winwap" (www.winwap.com to get it)
but did work on my Nokia 6630.

I assume thats because you don't yet support WML (which is essential for the "mass market")

Nice service

At 09:39 07/08/2005, marcus saw wrote:
Reading these posts and more I have come to my own conclusions and have put up a service I think you might find interesting.  It is a simple idea and uses the current direction of standard 'web' technologies to overcome the common hurdle of mobile presentation. 
 
What technology am I talking about ? Well I am talking about RSS, which in my mind is the perfect solution for quickly providing a mobile version of existing content.  
 
RSS is taking off as a popular medium and is being hailed as the 'mailing list killer' on some news articles [1] [2] . Whilst I don't believe the hype that RSS will ever replace content driven web sites, I do believe that it will be widely adopted by the Internet community and will be a great 'middle layer' for providing mobile content. 
 
The site I created is a beta to test out this theory.  It is free of course, will remain free and does not require registration prior to use.  All it does is re-format RSS feeds into pages that can be read by mobile phones.  It currently supports XHTML, JHTML and CHTML and I will work to create the correct rendering for any other standard I come across.
 
I have been using the site to get content on my mobile phone whilst I am in Japan, there are plenty of mobile sites here of course but not that many that cater for the English language user and that's the main reason I built this service.
 
I would be interested in any feedback you may have and whether you to can see the benefits of using RSS as a middle layer for multi-channel presentation.
1. http://www.feedforall.com/future-rss-not-blogs.htm
2. http://www.llrx.com/features/rss.htm
 
OK I hope that I have not offended anyone by using this as an opportunity to promote my service but it is meant to be an on-topic, relevant demonstration of the use of RSS.
 
So go to http://www.pixs.jp on your mobile phone and let me know what you think.
 
Rgds,
 
Marcus.
http://cellsuite.blogspot.com
 
 

Nicolas Combelles <nicolas.combelles@apocope.com> wrote:


   > I think mobile users are different to Web users as print reading was

   different to Web surfing.


   Exactly, mobile IS a new media, but a media using "same" IT technologies

   that PC. 


   Even print can benefit from web technologies :

   You can have specific CSS for print, but this is for "smart rendering of a

   printed WEB page", not to create a magazine ad page.


   So specific "handeld" CSS may be considered to be for "smart rendering of a

   mobile-displayed WEB page". But creating a real mobile-user-centric

   application such as weather news or maps, requires more specific design and

   programming, even if it is still using web technologies.


   Understanding these two (with a very blurred fronteer) levels (acceptable

   rendering, and real mobile user experience) is the key.


   Regards,

   Nicolas Combelles

   Apocope


   -----Message d'origine-----

   De : public-bpwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] De la

   part de Tammy

   Envoyé : jeudi 4 août 2005 05:33

   À : Tim Moss

   Cc : Paul Walsh; public-bpwg@w3.org

   Objet : Re: Best Practices document - not best practices



   Not using redundant information on a page doesn't mean it must deleted or

   not used on a mobile Web site, but it is only displayed in it's rightful

   place where it is the main content. I think mobile users are different to

   Web users as print reading was different to Web surfing.


   I'd like to read the working drafts posted below so I can add or comment but

   I don't have access, I was curious if they have already determined a

   recommendation for page sizes/graphic sizes for an 'optimal' page download

   wait time.


   I had an optimal user experience: Using my cell phone with zip entry and a

   few clicks I was able to get to a weather satellite picture of our county

   while I was stuck in a building with no power. Most weather sites would have

   taken time/power download all the unused data as well as be difficult to

   wade through all the information.


   Tamara Taylor


   Tim Moss wrote:


   > I was quite literally talking about visual design, rather than site 

   > structure which are two different but relevant aspects of 'design' in 

   > this context.

   > There seemed to be an implication that one could just 'drop' or not 

   > display all the "redundant branding and navigation information" and 

   > then the site would magically be ok on a mobile device.

   > Even if "just" this could be simply achieved what I'm saying is that 

   > the end result would be pretty horrible, many companies spend a lot of 

   > time and effort getting their site (rightly or wrongly) to look right.

   > They are not going to follow best practice guidelines that throw all 

   > of this effort away.

   > When I said

   >

   > "However, in recent years where digital media has been embraced by the 

   > artistic community, there are many examples of sites where the 

   > style/design *is* the content."

   >

   > I was talking about websites that have been produced by the 

   > artistic/creative community, that have no "information" on them; the 

   > website itself is a piece of electronic/digital art. (thats what I 

   > meant a bit later by 'particular art form' - art doesn't have to live 

   > on the wall of a gallery!)

   >

   > If we we to drop all the 'design' and "redundant branding and 

   > navigation" then with these sites you'd be left with a blank page, so 

   > the mobile experience would be pretty poor.

   >

   > This is an extreme example, but illustrates the fact that the layout 

   > of the site can add to the user's understanding of it; a site may 

   > convey more information that just the text on the page.

   >

   > Going back to Google as an example, google (and surely they know best 

   > what works for them) felt that, as clean and simple their website is, 

   > it is still too complicated for a mobile device, and have given us an 

   > alternative that works better on a mobile. (OK they shouldn't have put 

   > it on a different URL, but then they haven't yet got any Best 

   > Practices to tell them not to!) You've mentioned several times that 

   > the MWI is not about adapting content specifically for mobile devices.

   > One of us must be misunderstanding something.

   > For example, the BPWG Charter [1] states:

   > The guidelines produced by the MWBP Working Group are intended to 

   > enable content to be seamlessly adapted across a range of device form 

   > factors.

   > the DDWG Charter [2] states:

   > The mission of the MWI Device Description Working Group (DDWG) is to 

   > enable the development of globally accessible, sustainable data and 

   > services that provide device description information applicable to 

   > content adaptation.

   > the DDWG homepage [5] states:

   > The objective of the Mobile Web Initiative is to enable access to the 

   > Web from mobile devices. It is envisaged that this will typically 

   > require adaptation of Web content, which relies on device knowledge..

   > The recent BPWG working draft [2] says:

   > This document specifies best practices to ensure an *optimal* user 

   > experience for people accessing the Web with mobile devices.

   > which in practice is very unlikely to be achieved without adaptation.

   > [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/01/BPWGCharter/Overview.html

   > [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/01/DDWGCharter/

   > [3] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/DDWG/

   > [4] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/MOK/050727

   > Tim Moss

   > CTO

   > Bango

   > e: tim@bango.com <?xml:namespace prefix = mailto />

   > m: +44 78 8779 4032

   > t: +44 12 2347 2823

   > w: http://www.bango.com Mobile Content World 

   > 2005

   > ******************************************************************

   > "Come and see us on stand 14 at MCW 2005 Olympia Conference Centre, 

   > London, UK 13th - 15th September 2005"

   > www.mobilecontentworld.biz 

   >

   >

   ------------------------------------------------------------------------

   > *From:* Paul Walsh [mailto:paulwalsh@segalamtest.com]

   > *Sent:* 01 August 2005 12:05

   > *To:* Tim Moss; 'Daniel Barclay'; public-bpwg@w3.org

   > *Subject:* RE: Best Practices document - not best practices

   >

   > 'What is good design’ is a very interesting topic and one that

   > most people seem to get wrong.

   >

   >> -----Original Message-----

   >

   >> From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org

   > [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] On

   >

   >> Behalf Of Tim Moss

   >

   >> Sent: 31 July 2005 09:59

   >

   >> To: Daniel Barclay; public-bpwg@w3.org

   >

   >> Subject: RE: Best Practices document - not best practices

   >

   >>

   >

   >>

   >

   >> Daniel wrote:

   >

   >> > If you're talking about the typically large amount of mostly

   >

   >> > redundant "branding" and navigation information that

   >

   >> > typically appears at the top (and frequently left) of pages:

   >

   >> > That's not a tool issue, that's a page design issue (or

   >

   >> > possibly a page implementation issue).

   >

   >>

   >

   >> To many organisations the branding and design of their web

   > information

   >

   >> is extremely important, and they spend a lot of time, money and other

   >

   >> resource on these areas of content development.

   >

   >>

   >

   >> Some regard the design of a site as irrelevant and sometimes slight

   >

   >> 'design' driven sites as suffering from the flaw of valuing

   > 'style over

   >

   >> content'

   >

   > [PW] Those who regard ‘the design of a site as irrelevant’ don’t

   > know what they’re talking about when it comes to creating an

   > online presence that will attract and encourage visitors to

   > return. These people need to be brought into a classroom and

   > taught the basics of how to build a meaningful online presence.

   > Tim, I don’t disagree with you; these people do unfortunately

   > exist. However, we certainly shouldn’t incorporate this thought

   > process when creating a best practise unless we use them as case

   > studies for ‘what not to do’ or ‘how not to do it’.

   >

   > Look at the Web Accessibility Initiative

   > – this is a perfect example of

   > another W3C initiative with a huge mountain to climb in terms of

   > changing the mindset of web designers (aka content authors) and

   > online decision makers. I feel a lot of the foundation work has

   > already been done by this group; designers are already starting to

   > rethink and incorporate these best practises.

   >

   > Most large corporate websites are driven by marketers/brand owners

   > who want a 'funky', 'state of the art', 'all singing all dancing'

   > website because they think it's necessary to attract visitors and

   > stand out from their competitors. In fact, when you ask these same

   > marketers what their favourite site is, their answer is usually

   > 'Google'! Why? Because it's clean, friendly and easy to get the

   > information you require.

   >

   > It has never been proven that lots of fantastic artwork has been

   > the deciding factor for a visitor to buy from a site. BTW, this is

   > a real life example of an Operator Portal in the UK. This same

   > Operator is completely redesigning their Portal from the ground up

   > as they realise the importance to make it accessible and user

   > friendly.

   >

   > Unfortunately creative design agencies are constantly trying to

   > create something ‘different’ using technology that they don’t

   > fully understand, and they sometimes loose sight of what the

   > customer actually wants.

   >

   >> However, in recent years where digital media has been embraced by the

   >

   >> artistic community, there are many examples of sites where the

   >

   >> style/design *is* the content.

   >

   > [PW] Only if visitors aren’t prohibited from reaching the content

   > because of poor design! Don’t fall into the trap of thinking you

   > can just resize or adapt the ‘content’ and all will be ok. This is

   > not true – Web design principles such as logically constructed

   > information architecture, ease of navigation, readability,

   > consistency, load time, and look and feel are the most important

   > factors when building an online presence.

   >

   >>

   >

   >> Why shouldn't these sites be accessible on mobile devices, by those

   >

   >> users who appreciate that particular art form.

   >

   > [PW] I’m not sure what you mean by ‘particular art form’. But let

   > me point out again that people don’t buy from websites because

   > they like the ‘art’. The only people who enjoy browsing websites

   > for their ascetics are ‘creative’ people who are visiting those

   > sites for that reason alone. NB. Websites that have been created

   > specifically for people who appreciate ‘art form’ could also

   > potentially discriminate against people who need to use assistive

   > technologies such as screen readers. This is relevant as we’re

   > trying to create ‘one web’ (where possible).

   >

   >>

   >

   >>

   >

   >> > Designers apparently think users need a link to everywhere

   >

   >> > from every single page (yes, okay, I exaggerate a bit),

   >

   >> > instead of just some "breadcrumbs" to show where you are

   >

   >> > within the site (and/or larger

   >

   >> > document) and a link or two up toward higher-level pages that

   >

   >> > provide downward (and sideways) navigation links.

   >

   >>

   >

   >> Maybe a solution to this is to include (semi-automatically if using a

   >

   >> tool) metadata in the markup that denotes these parts of the page as

   >

   >> being navigation blocks. This could allow the browser software to

   >

   >> choose not to display them with the meat/content. The browser could

   >

   >> perhaps implement some hotkey or shortcut mechanism to allow the

   > user to

   >

   >> quickly jump between the navigation and content elements of a page..

   >

   >>

   >

   >> Hopefully the site would then still be usable on a mobile device, and

   >

   >> wouldn't require a complete redesign.

   >

   >>

   >

   >>

   >

   >> One of the MWI's success criteria is:

   >

   >> "User community and Industry adoption of the deliverables."

   >

   >>

   >

   >> I believe that the content industry (mobile or otherwise) is unlikely

   >

   >> adopt the deliverables if it feels that huge amount of redesign

   > effort

   >

   >> is required to comply with the Best Practices, when the end result is

   >

   >> design and branding free sites like websites were back in 1996

   >

   > [PW] Let’s not forget that we are not just creating a best

   > practise for current websites, we are creating a best practise for

   > future content authoring. We need to assume that some element of

   > redesign of current websites will be required; otherwise the best

   > practises won’t encourage any form of design improvements. Most

   > websites are not built with the small screen in mind, so a

   > redesign of most websites will be required ‘today’. In future,

   > content authors will not make assumptions about the size of the

   > screen and hopefully make the necessary design consideration right

   > from the start.

   >

   > Re ‘design and branding free sites back 1996’ – this is because

   > the potential of the Web wasn’t realised back then. I had to self

   > learn how to build websites in ‘95 so I could teach the trainers

   > at AOL in the UK and there wasn’t a great deal of technology that

   > created barriers to usability and most people were sceptical about

   > online marketing.

   >

   > It’s important to note that the MWI is about encouraging a best

   > practise for content authoring where design is at the heart of it

   > all. It’s not about how to best squeeze or adapt content

   > specifically for a mobile phone.

   >

   > Kind regards,

   >

   > Paul

   >

   >>

   >

   >>

   >

   >>

   >

   >>

   >

   >>

   >

   >>

   >

   >>

   >

   >> Tim Moss

   >

   >> CTO

   >

   >> Bango

   >

   >>

   >

   >> e: tim@bango.com

   >

   >> m: +44 78 8779 4032

   >

   >> t: +44 12 2347 2823

   >

   >> w: http://www.bango.com

   >

   >>

   >

   >>

   >

   >> Mobile Content World 2005

   >

   >> ******************************************************************

   >

   >> "Come and see us on stand 14 at MCW 2005

   >

   >> Olympia Conference Centre, London, UK

   >

   >> 13th - 15th September 2005"

   >

   >> www.mobilecontentworld.biz

   >

   >>

   >








How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos. Get Yahoo! Photos 

Ray Anderson   T:+44 7768 454545    F:+44 20 7692 5558  
ray@bango.com 


 


		
---------------------------------
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.

Received on Sunday, 7 August 2005 12:59:13 UTC