W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > April to June 2003

Re: Technical Factors: Different Devices

From: Alan Chuter <achuter@teleservicios.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 10:00:25 +0200
To: Chuck Letourneau <cpl@starlingweb.com>, w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
Message-ID: <oprp6luzavso27mf@mail.teleservicios.com>

I think there's a big difference between a single page for all desktop 
computer browsers, or one that will work on all mobile phones, and one that 
will work across all devices.

Many sites try to detect the browser and serve up separate versions, for MS 
IE and for Netscape, for example. This is the kind of duplication 
accessible design can avoid. But to try to make a page work on all devices 
is fighting a losing battle.

I think that some sites will have to have multiple versions for different 
device profiles, but what we should claim is that each of these versions 
will be usable with all user agents and devices within that profile.

Alan Chuter
achuter@teleservicios.com
+34 91 121 03 35



On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 14:53:37 -0400, Chuck Letourneau <cpl@starlingweb.com> 
wrote:

>
> The draft says:
> @@ add something to Benefits about multiple versions vs one (accessible) 
> version
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/bcase/tech.html#repurpose
>
> Something about this bothers me (but even after rewriting this message 
> four times I'm not sure I'm expressing my concern very well... )
>
> Does anyone really think it is practical to create one page - even a 
> properly/carefully/thoughtfully designed page - that can adequately serve 
> a wide range of devices without device-specific style-sheets?
>
> In the abstract I still believe this is possible, but the most common 
> complaint I hear against the theory is that such a page will produce sub- 
> optimal renderings on some target devices.  It begs the questions: is it 
> of more benefit from a marketing/customer service standpoint to serve 
> pages that are optimized for a range of customer's devices, or will the 
> reduction in development and maintenance costs of one page outweigh this 
> marketing consideration?
>
> If, on the other hand, what we really mean by "one accessible version" is 
> one fixed content package associated with one or more sets of device- 
> specific style sheet instructions then we have to be explicit in stating 
> this.
>
> I guess I don't have enough confidence in the ability of  current user- 
> agents to adequately render even perfectly compliant markup and style 
> without author-intervention.
>
> Comments? Discussion? Brick through my window?
>
> Chuck Letourneau
>
> Starling Access Services
> "Access A World Of Possibility"
>
>
>



-- 
Received on Tuesday, 3 June 2003 04:01:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 10:33:36 GMT