W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > June 2005

Re: The devices-universal websites "myth" and the semantic web

From: Kai Hendry <hendry@iki.fi>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 10:34:23 +1000
To: Andrea Trasatti <atrasatti@gmail.com>
Cc: public-bpwg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20050620003422.GB17863@iki.fi>

On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 03:22:42PM +0200, Andrea Trasatti wrote:
> for mobile devices). So maybe the best practices group should push the
> manufacturers and browser developers to try to squish the nasty bugs
> that limit the developers most AND direct the software developers

Yes. The W3C should get into marketing mode instead of geek mode for
this. W3 need to push some sort of UA certification program. Something
with a silly name like Web Ready! 1.0 and a sexy logo. Basic HTML and
CSS compliance with perhaps a mobile emphasis. This group could work on
the test cases. 

Maybe some sort of strategy with images. Currently images are the
blockers. They're expensive to download and manipulate.

We need more of these:
http://www.opera.com/products/mobile/accelerator/

I wish there was widespread support for a scalable bitmap graphics
format:
http://natalian.org/archives/2005/01/21/images/

Problem is I think only Opera could possibly be compliant to a UA
certification program. Maybe with that Apple webkit:
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/13/1158208&from=rss
Though this will take a *long* time. :/

> What I am trying to say is that we can sit here and say that mobile
> browsers suck, but that won't solve the problem. In my opinion the
> right path is to talk all together and identify the best path to avoid
> them and still produce a good experience to the user. This is what I
> would expect from a "best practices" manual.

Rewind five years. When Desktop browsers were more crap and more
platform specific. W3 could not help steer developers in the right
direction then and I don't see how it can do it now. It has to use all
those corporate connections. Influence those guys to care about the UA.

Perhaps a (open) Web UA platform is more important. So that users can
upgrade or choose a better UA.

> Also we should identify if the "best practices" is directed to web
> sites developers, software developers or browser developers. If we
> want to let know the browser developers about their bugs, then we only
> need a Bugzilla.

I hate Bugzilla. ;) The W3 doing QA for mobile UAs? Ok, not a bad idea.
W3 could parade bad bugs on their front page. Though it's hard to
imagine now. :)
Received on Monday, 20 June 2005 00:36:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:42:55 UTC