Re: What is "mobile" (was Re: Fwd: Screen Reader Audio on Mobile)

>> That said, I don't see why the technique buckets that the Mobile Note
>> (and Understanding WCAG) points to couldn't be named along the lines
>> you suggest "Touchscreen extension" etc.
> 
> The techniques/undestanding, but not the actual guidelines? Hmm, as long as that's clear enough to devs...but as said, probably too late to backtrack on that (which is why I think, going back to my first point, that it's important to stress in the initial scene-setting for the document the way that "mobile" is used as an umbrella term).


if we have made a mistake in naming the document or effort - we should not perpetuate the error.   It only makes it worse and confuses the issue and the readers.

Also - the name needs to reflect what is meant.  or else it is more confusion. 

I don’t think the fact that a word is used a lot - is a good reason to use it where it does not belong.   Just a good reason for it to be in a dictionary. 

No? 

gregg

----------------------------------
Gregg Vanderheiden
gregg@raisingthefloor.org




> On Oct 6, 2015, at 2:26 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> On 06/10/2015 19:11, Richards, Jan wrote:
>> Hi Patrick,
>> 
>> While I completely agree that there is nothing fundamentally unique
>> to mobile on the list, I think it's too far to say, as you suggest,
>> that "the note should clarify that indeed there is no such thing as
>> "mobile"
> 
> Maybe in not so many words, but I'd say it needs to strongly convey that individual characteristics covered by the extension are relevant in their own right, regardless of whether or not a particular device would be called "mobile" or not.
> 
> Not that it counts for much, but it seems I'm not the only one that thinks this way... https://twitter.com/patrick_h_lauke/status/651446133768761344
> 
>> For one, "mobile" is a *very* commonly used term and so when people
>> are concerned about how to make mobile offerings accessible,
> 
> Perhaps a bit tautological - for people who use the term "mobile" / have what they call themselves "mobile offerings", yes ... the term they'll look for is indeed "mobile".
> 
> Conversely, what about developers who don't use the word "mobile", but have a "touchscreen driven offering" (to work on both mobile phones, tablets, touchscreen laptops, etc)? They won't be immediately thinking "ah, I need the 'mobile' extension for this..."
> 
>> they'll
>> likely use that term in their search and we want them to find our
>> page.
>> 
>> That said, I don't see why the technique buckets that the Mobile Note
>> (and Understanding WCAG) points to couldn't be named along the lines
>> you suggest "Touchscreen extension" etc.
> 
> The techniques/undestanding, but not the actual guidelines? Hmm, as long as that's clear enough to devs...but as said, probably too late to backtrack on that (which is why I think, going back to my first point, that it's important to stress in the initial scene-setting for the document the way that "mobile" is used as an umbrella term).
> 
> P
> -- 
> Patrick H. Lauke
> 
> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>