- From: Matt May <mcmay@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 11:50:18 -0700
- To: Alan Chuter <achuter@teleservicios.com>
- Cc: Chuck Letourneau <cpl@starlingweb.com>, w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
On Tuesday, June 3, 2003, at 01:00 AM, Alan Chuter wrote: > I think that some sites will have to have multiple versions for > different device profiles, but what we should claim is that each of > these versions will be usable with all user agents and devices within > that profile. It appears that this discussion brushes against the difference between "usable" and "capable of being used." While the former is subjective and squishy, the latter can be claimed by standards-conformant sites on all devices. The value of browsing a 2-megabyte file over a 9.6kbps connection through a four-line phone display notwithstanding. If sites are designed in a uniform fashion, and in a transformation-capable language such as XHTML, the case could be made that adhering to a common style (e.g., valid code, sections marked up with <h*>, alt text) affords the author the ability to transform the existing files in place for use by mobile or smaller displays using XSLT. I do tend to think most of the descriptions I've seen of this benefit are a bit overoptimistic or lacking in detail. You don't get this for free unless you plan for it. But relative to the jaw-dropping sums companies are happy to charge sites for screen-scraping services, it may sell some people, or at least get them thinking more about their designs. And that dovetails well with the Quality Assurance activity and their documents on designing for standards. - m
Received on Tuesday, 3 June 2003 14:50:34 UTC