- From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:54:02 +0200
- To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Cc: public-web-mobile@w3.org
Le mardi 17 septembre 2013 à 14:25 +0100, Patrick H. Lauke a écrit : > > As far as I can tell, the main reason "mobile" is so popular is that it > > combines a number of characteristics: > > * always (or at least, very easily) connected > > * easy to transport > > * easy to start > > * allowing rich interactions > > I have to admit that, of the above, only "easy to transport" really > strikes me as intrinsically "mobile" (though then ultrabooks, new > lightweight/thin laptops, etc would also be covered). Note that I wasn't trying to define "mobile" as much as identify why so many people (this group included) cares about mobile; and I still think the combination of this 4 factors remain pretty specific to mobile for the wider population. > Anything else also > applies to most, if not all, traditional "desktop" machines (my PC is > always on, and when it's not it takes seconds to start/wake, and yes I > do seem to have a few rich interactions with a > touchscreen/mouse/keyboard combo). My impression is that for many people (I included), turning a computer on (even if it's simply asleep, but many people still turn their computers off) is associated with a lot more "work" than just waking your phone; but I don't have hard data to back that assertion up. And yes, computers clearly also enable rich interactions, but that you can only properly use in fairly static situations. > Some time ago one aspect specific to the "mobile context" that was being > discussed were sensors...geolocation, motion, light, etc. But again, > those are now present in many laptops and even desktops, and have their > uses there as well (for instance, even though it's sitting on my desk, I > appreciate that I can have geolocation to convey my - static - location > for sites to tailor their offerings/results). (just to reiterate — I'm specifically not trying to define a mobile context; just put in perspective why "mobile" is all the rage at a more abstract level than a particular kind of device) > The distinction does feel rather artificial at this point. But I am > interested in the more generalised multi-modal aspect here: content, > services, interactions that adapt to differences in input and output > modes (small screens, audio-only outputs, full-HD displays, mouse, > touch, keyboard, voice commands, screenreaders, etc). Yes; that's definitely where I want us to go :) Dom
Received on Tuesday, 17 September 2013 13:54:20 UTC