- From: Tom Hume <Tom.Hume@futureplatforms.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 18:44:35 +0000
- To: Luca Passani <passani@eunet.no>
- Cc: public-bpwg-ct <public-bpwg-ct@w3.org>
On 7 Jan 2009, at 17:59, Luca Passani wrote: >>>>> > sean: Sometimes there's content for high-end phones tagged as >>>>> > "mobile" that may not work on a low-end phone. We already >>>>> have a >>>>> > method for keeping proxies away from content, "no-transform" >>>> Which bit of Seans comment do you disagree with here Luca? >>> I disagree with the idea that who runs the network feels entitled >>> to know better than those who created the application and owns the >>> copyright. Can I? >> >> Course you can :) I don't see any assertion to the contrary in the >> comment from Sean that you quoted. > > Sean's comment reveals that Novarra feels entitled to reformat > mobile content to make it better (for their definition of better). I > disagree with that notion. What's your problem? I couldn't see much to disagree with in the statement you quoted: some content for high-end phones doesn't work on low-end phones. We have a method for keeping proxies away from content. >>> OK, so, since your ask for it, I will repeat all the arguments >>> here (and by the way, Russ wrote that comment when he was still >>> trying to make Mowser fly, so he was heavily biased at the time). I don't agree that anyone currently working on a transcoder product is temporarily unable to comment on these issues I'm afraid. Was your opinion invalid when you worked for OpenWave? Of course not. > The XHTML Mime type can be used for web content only theoretically. > In practice nobody uses that MIME type for full-web content simply > because it would break way too easily on all browsers (save-as > dialog for MSIE users, catastrophic error messages and no content at > all for Firefox, Opera and Mozilla). Nobody uses XHTML for full web > content, not even those who think they are using XHTML (somewhere > they'll be doing something which will make all browsers reverse to > quicks mode and consider their xhtmllish mark-up as nothing more > than tag-soup). > Because of this, application/xml+xhtml is an excellent heuristics to > detect mobile content (the only place where the MIME type is adopted). Yep, I agree. It's an excellent heuristic - but not absolute. The difference between these two states was a topic of debate in the last call - you'll see that we're breaking out heuristics which can be considered absolute and discussing making support for them more necessary. A quick google shows lots of sites from web developers recommending use of xhtml+xml for web content. -- 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 18:45:12 UTC