RE: URLs and access issues

> I suggest we lobby .MOBI to support (M) as an alternative to buying a new domain name.... 

The .mobi top level domain is already a reality.
 
A MobileOK trustmark with appropriate logo, phrase or tag-line to be used in conjunction with advertised URLs is a good idea. It could be applied to any URL, including the inevitable .mobi domains.
 
The problem with "FAX" is that it gives the impression that the number is unsuitable for voice. We don't want a situation when a MobileOK logo/phrase is mis-interpreted as meaning that access from (traditional?) fixed browsers would not work. Instead we want something like "suitable for vegetarians", which obviously doesn't prevent the meat-lovers from getting a feed.
 
---Rotan
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Anderson [mailto:ray@bango.net]
Sent: 09 August 2005 14:50
To: Tim Moss; Ray Anderson; Rotan Hanrahan; public-bpwg@w3.org
Subject: RE: URLs and access issues


I'd also like to add another suggestion at this point.

The idea of having different URL's for different devices is no use, and thats why .MOBI and wap.site.com etc. are 
never going to reach the mainstream.  What is needed however (which in someways underlies the .mobi idea)
is an indicator to users that a URL will probably work if they enter it on their phone.

Its the same idea that is used on phone numbers.  Some people say FAX 01223 472778 or GSM 07768 123456
to give a clue (Fax or smsable) about phone numbers.

I believe the time is right to encourage the use of a symbolic way of saying "try it on your mobile", or "works on WAP" 
My suggestion is that web addresses followed by (M) are accessible while mobile.  So, an ad might say, visit
bango at www.bango.net <http://www.bango.net/>   (M)   or   go to www.vodafone.com <http://www.vodafone.com/>  (M)  
The good news is that the (M) is not a trademark and easy to use wherever a user could show a URL (like in the text above)
Its also clearly not part of the URL.  Web sites that falseley state (M) will earn disrespect.  Site owners will be encouraged to use (M) to drive more usage.   It does not cost any extra or imply too much, other than making people follow the Mobile Web initiative.

I suggest we lobby .MOBI to support (M) as an alternative to buying a new domain name.... 



 [...]