- From: Kai Hendry <hendry@iki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 11:46:55 +0000
- To: Slim Amamou <slim@alixsys.com>
- Cc: public-mw4d@w3.org
Why didn't you post the canonical URL? http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mobile-usability.html Why did you mark the downloadable application? Are you pointing out the risks associated with downloadable Java/Iphone applications that aren't Web based? I can understand why they suggest a separate mobile site. Tbh I use http://news.bbc.co.uk/text_only.stm from my cutting edge G1 device, since the BBC news page is too bloated and poorly designed. However this fragmentation does cause a few serious problems which aren't addressed, such as fragmentation(broken links) and as they point out earlier... unfamiliarity. Half the problems can be mitigated by keeping the site simple and small. So I find the reports recommendation of a "special mobile version", a dangerous one. At the very least they should point out the cons! I am little worried about their "trend of the year in application design" claim. Mobiles aren't a Web application platform (HTML5) yet. So I fear this "demand" might be fulfilled by fragmented non-Web solutions. I hope to see phase 1, i.e. widgets work on mobiles first. http://dabase.com/blog/Widgets_are_simple_offline_packages/ Kind regards,
Received on Wednesday, 18 February 2009 11:47:37 UTC