- From: Nicolas Combelles <nicolas.combelles@apocope.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 15:55:42 +0200
- To: <public-bpwg@w3.org>
I agree that using "mobile" is not appropriate. Even if I find it to be the most acceptable and user understandable for now in a two url strategy. Kevin > your mail about this basic WML news site without images that isn't suited for your smartphone, confirm two things : - As Andrea Trasatti and I pointed before, one might purposely want to display the desktop version of a site on its phone and vice versa. However, I think this is not a very common issue (a mobile-geek or developper issue ?). - Device adaptation is a lot more than having a unique degraded version of a website. Offering the best possible rendering depending on the handset capacity is very important. However, automatic adapation sometime isn't enough when it comes to information design. For example, my main current project is to build a mobile version and a smartphone/PDA version for an international brand. The mobile version can still be accessed from a PDA, with a nice xhtml/css rendering. But the PDA version has more static content, a smarter navigation system and heavier graphical charter. But this 3 versions strategy raise much more questions than the URL problem, as the fronteer between poor and smart mobile and between mobile and PDA cannot be defined easily. Cheers, Nicolas Combelles Apocope -----Message d'origine----- De : public-bpwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] De la part de Rotan Hanrahan Envoyé : lundi 8 août 2005 15:00 À : public-bpwg@w3.org Objet : RE: Best Practices document - not best practices http://news.bbc.co.uk/detailed/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/summary/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/bite-sized/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/headlines/ These seem better to me than http://news.bbc.co.uk/mobile/ The URLs should describe the resource, not the mechanism/device that is used to access the resource. Strictly speaking, in purist terms, the URL should be opaque and not reveal anything, but we have evolved in our perception of the way the Web works and we now have a reasonable expectation that the URL reflects the resource it references. I would prefer to be able to enter any of the URLs in my list into my device (mobile or otherwise) and get something that is appropriate to my device and yet also reflects the expectation I had when I selected those particular URLs. When we see .../mobile/ in a URL we may be inferring something about the nature of the resource because of our current understanding of what "mobile " means. But mobile is diverse, and becoming more diverse over time, so the meaning of mobile is fluid. It would be wrong to infer something about the nature of the resource based on some loose notion about the devices that access it. So I don't approve of device-specific information appearing in the path, though I know that for technical reasons some sites choose to do so. ---Rotan. -----Original Message----- From: Andrea Crevola [mailto:andrea.crevola@3juice.com] Sent: 08 August 2005 13:27 To: public-bpwg@w3.org Subject: Re: Best Practices document - not best practices Hi, the use of two different urls gives to the user the choiche for choose the version that is much closer to his needs. I think that this kind of selection has a positive effect on user experience (sorry if you have already discussed about this idea, but I've started reading the list only during last days...) and I think also that has to be mainteined someway. This involves adaptation: we can detect distribution context [1], but how many and which degrees of freedom we have to preserve for our user? And at what level (website, page, element, style)? What are your opinions? Best regards, Andrea [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-di-dco-20050118/ Holley Kevin (Centre) wrote: > Dear All, > > I am not entirely in agreement with this. Just looking at these sites: > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/ > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/mobile/ > > I much prefer the original non-mobile site even on my mobile because the photographs are missing from the "mobile" site. Many site designers seem to equate "mobile" to "text only" and rich media is really a trade off between screen estate, time to load and content. I am not clear that "one size fits all users" will really work for this. > > Regards, > > Kevin > -- e-mail: andrea.crevola[at]3juice.com msn: andrea.crevola[at]hotmail.com "Ogni minuto è un'occasione per rivoluzionare tutto completamente."
Received on Monday, 8 August 2005 13:53:51 UTC