- From: Sean Owen <srowen@google.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:35:14 -0500
- To: achuter.technosite@yahoo.com
- Cc: "MWI BPWG Public" <public-bpwg@w3.org>
On Feb 11, 2008 7:34 AM, Alan Chuter <achuter@technosite.es> wrote: > I think that calling it Basic implies that compliance with it is a > first step for developers. What it's really useful for is > benchmarking, for determining whether sites haven't done "something" > relevant, but that something is not related to whether the content > will really be useable. It implies that when a user sees a "pro" label > that means that the site has striven hard to be mobile-friendly, while > really as far as the user is concerned the difference is baffling > because the choice has been determined by something internal to the > tester that the user knows nothing about about. The MOK Basic document > perpetuates this misconception "mobileOK Basic is the lesser of two > levels of claim, the greater level being mobileOK Pro". It's not about > greater or lesser, but rather about the resources available to the > testing body. The logic behind the tests and the naming was an amazingly complex topic of discussion, so what we have ended up with is probably quite good enough and the best we'll agree on. I don't see it as problematic though. Basic isn't trivial, and I don't know I agree that its requirements are not relevant to usability. I also don't see it's a misconception that Basic is the lesser claim or standard, since it is specifically a strict subset of Pro. That is in fact exactly how we want people to understand it, so I think this will not be inconsistent or confusing in practice. Each label, Basic and Pro, communicates pretty clearly "lesser" and "greater".
Received on Monday, 11 February 2008 16:35:32 UTC