- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 15:55:15 -0700
- To: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net>
- Cc: WAI Interest Group Emailing List <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
At 04:35 PM 10/25/1999 , David Poehlman wrote: >let's take this to a higher and clearer position? What we are >actually supposing is that the cell phone belongs to the company and >the users are tapping in or wanting to as part of their work as >directed... Then the company would decide "we are now supporting cell phones on our intranet." Although, if their intranet doesn't work with cell phones (because they designed for IE 5.0 or whatever), it's unlikely that they'd take this step casually. The Cult of Interoperability would argue that if they'd done it right in the first place, they wouldn't have to spend extra time adapting it to use on a cell phone. But the other side would say that it doesn't make sense to spend a lot of time and money to support _every possible software/hardware combo_ up front, on the off chance that you might decide to use that in the future. It doesn't make sense to spend that much money when you can just support one browser that's been agreed upon/mandated, and if you need cell phone support, you could just create a new section of the Intranet to support _that_. -- Kynn Bartlett mailto:kynn@hwg.org President, HTML Writers Guild http://www.hwg.org/ AWARE Center Director http://aware.hwg.org/
Received on Monday, 25 October 1999 19:03:52 UTC