Re: MobileOK scheme

On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:59:38 +0200, Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi> wrote:

> I think we are talking at crossed purposes here.
>
>> I am saying that providing an enhanced experience to more powerful
>> devices is mobileOK (and is recommended behaviour). In other words,
>> that it
>
> No it's not mobileOK, but it is recommended behaviour..

To be even more precise - it is not defined as being MobileOK or not,  
since...

> mobileOK is specifically and narrowly defined to be the ability, in the  
> right circumstances, to deliver a DDC compatible experience as adjudged  
> by the mobileOK Tests 1.0 Recommendation.
>
> It is a Best Practice to do more than this, but the result is unlikely  
> to be mobileOK.

Why not? If done as recommended, I see no reason for it not to be  
mobileOK. (And if we simply say that mobileOK refers to fictitious  
devices, while what developers really do and need to do is not mobileOK,  
then I question the work we have put into this).

> See if you like the revision proposed later in this thread.

It seems to be an improvement, but I specifically object to that things  
which provide an enhanced experience for better browsers are not mobileOK,  
or even are likely not to be MobileOK.

cheers

Chaals

> Jo
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:chaals@opera.com]
>> Sent: 10 June 2009 17:39
>> To: Jo Rabin; Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group WG
>> Subject: Re: MobileOK scheme
>>
>> On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 20:55:23 +0200, Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi> wrote:
>>
>> > I don't think I am clear exactly what your point is.
>> >
>> > Are you saying that experiences that take advantage of higher device
>> > capabilities are not necessarily non mobileOK?
>>
>> I am saying that providing an enhanced experience to more powerful
>> devices
>> is mobileOK (and is recommended behaviour). In other words, that it
>> necessarily is not non-mobileOK to do so. (Breaking things for DDC is
>> nonMobileOK. Improving them for better browsers is mobileOK and
>> strongly
>> recommended).
>>
>> > Surely, if the higher tier experiences are mobileOK they'd also be
>> > provided to the lower-tier devices?
>>
>> No. What is provided to lower-tier devices is restricted in ways that
>> were
>> carefully designed not to preclude providing higher-tier systems with
>> more.
>>
>> > Perhaps this might be a cause of misunderstanding though, and would
>> it
>> > be better if we said:
>> >
>> > It is expected that content providers, as well as targetting DDC
>> level
>> > devices, will wish also to provide experiences that are not
>> necessarily
>> > mobileOK for more advanced mobile devices.
>>
>> No. It would be better if you said
>>
>> It is expected (and encouraged) that content providers, as well as
>> targetting DDC level devices with appropriately delivered content, will
>> enable richer experiences for more advanced mobile browsers.
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> Chaals
>>
>> > ?
>> >
>> > Jo
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org]
>> On
>> >> Behalf Of Charles McCathieNevile
>> >> Sent: 09 June 2009 19:05
>> >> To: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group WG
>> >> Subject: MobileOK scheme
>> >>
>> >> In the section on DDC it says
>> >>
>> >> "The DDC is thus not a target to aspire to, it merely sets a base
>> line
>> >> below which content providers do not need to provide their content.
>> It
>> >> is
>> >> expected that content providers, as well as targetting DDC level
>> >> devices,
>> >> will wish also to provide non-mobileOK experiences for more advanced
>> >> mobile devices."
>> >>
>> >> As I understand the Best Practices, they actually recommend
>> providing
>> >> an
>> >> experience for non-DDC devices which takes advantage of their
>> ability
>> >> to
>> >> do more than DDC - in other words, using the additional capabilities
>> of
>> >> more powerful browsers while ensuring that a DDC (or unknown device)
>> >> gets
>> >> content that meets the lowest level of requirements is in line with
>> >> MobileOK, rather than being non-mobileOK as the draft suggests.
>> >>
>> >> cheers
>> >>
>> >> Chaals
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
>> >>      je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
>> >> http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
>>      je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
>> http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com



-- 
Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com

Received on Monday, 15 June 2009 17:53:28 UTC