W3C

List of comments on “Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0” (dated 13 January 2006)

Quick access to

There are 171 comments (sorted by their types, and the section they are about).

1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 101-120 121-140 141-160 161-171

substantive comments

Comment LC-264
Commenter: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> (archived message)
Context: Document as a whole
Not assigned
Resolution status:

The terms "easily" and "efficiently" are almost unused in the document. In my opinion that do not add much information where they are used and might be safely deleted from this part of the document and from the best practices below.

I suspect this entire section could be reduced without significant loss of information to the following:

The quality of the user's Web experience via a mobile device depends significantly on the usability of Web sites, of browsers, and of the device itself. Although browser usability (for reading, navigating, and interacting with content) and device usability are important, this document focuses primarily on best practices for improving site usability.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-374
Commenter: Bruno von Niman (ANEC W3C) <ANEC_W3CRep_Bruno@vonniman.com> on behalf of ANEC (archived message)
Context: Document as a whole
Not assigned
Resolution status:

Chapter 1.3.3, One Web: With the currently available technologies and implementations
(and considering the product generation gaps), it is not always desirable, beneficial nor
affordable to consumers to access the same information, provided on the same format,
regardless of the access network and device.
Although technology will improve continuously, consumer requirements will be strongly
influenced by the context of mobile use (on the move, limited screen and keyboard,
disturbing environment, et cetera), will not change that radically.
Due to the context of mobile use, terminal capability variations, bandwidth issues, access
rights and mobile network capabilities, this principle should be reconsidered.
Even if it is easier to develop content for one Web, there are specific issues that need to be
addressed.
Providing a good and affordable mobile Web user experience becomes even more important
to roaming consumers (presently, there is no low-cost global roaming tariff plan for mobile
data devices).
We would like to discuss the approach taken and would appreciate to hear your arguments
for the “One Web� approach taken.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-375
Commenter: Bruno von Niman (ANEC W3C) <ANEC_W3CRep_Bruno@vonniman.com> on behalf of ANEC (archived message)
Context: Document as a whole
Not assigned
Resolution status:

Chapter 1.4, Default Delivery Context: More detailed specifications should be provided. In
addition, possible fall-back solutions should be mentioned.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-436
Commenter: <fsasaki@w3.org> on behalf of I18N WG (archived message)
Context: in
Not assigned
Resolution status:

Comment from the i18n review of:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-mobile-bp-20060113/

Comment 21
At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0602-mwbp10/
Editorial/substantive: S
Owner: RI
Location in reviewed document:
General

Comment:

We believe the document should encourage all participants in the mobile value chain to support Unicode. This is extremely helpful in ensuring international use of this technology and ease of localization of content.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-366
Commenter: Bruno von Niman (ANEC W3C) <ANEC_W3CRep_Bruno@vonniman.com> on behalf of ANEC (archived message)
Context: Document as a whole
Not assigned
Resolution status:

We believe that Web site access through mobile devices would benefit from the
provision of some minimum-level requirements on terminal capabilities and browser
features. If this cannot be achieved, other work should be referenced.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-391: stricter scrolling limits
Commenter: <Jyri.Hagman@nokia.com> on behalf of Nokia (archived message)
Context: Document as a whole
Not assigned
Resolution status:

5.3.3 Scrolling
There could be a stricter recommendation: Limit scrolling
while reading a single text flow to one direction.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-367
Commenter: Bruno von Niman (ANEC W3C) <ANEC_W3CRep_Bruno@vonniman.com> on behalf of ANEC (archived message)
Context: Document as a whole
Not assigned
Resolution status:

Accessibility should be addressed more specifically, as the mobile Web (and its
specific issues) does not seem to be in the scope of the WAI/WCAG guidelines 2.0,
currently under updating. The provided cross-referencing is beneficial but it does not
provide enough substance.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-368
Commenter: Bruno von Niman (ANEC W3C) <ANEC_W3CRep_Bruno@vonniman.com> on behalf of ANEC (archived message)
Context: Document as a whole
Not assigned
Resolution status:

Access to the mobile Web through a speech user interface is not covered by the
present draft version. We believe it should be addressed (also as there is excellent
work in W3C to cross-reference), as it is an important accessibility enabler to young
and older users and users with temporary or permanent functional abilities.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-346
Commenter: Ville Karinen <ville.karinen@helsinki.fi> (archived message)
Context: Document as a whole
Not assigned
Resolution status:

Hello all,

i remember there was some discussion whether MWBP promotes One Web or
not, but in any case, i guess one goal of the *document* is to explain
different kind of approaches or strategies how Web can be served
for/accessed via mobile device.

"The primary goal is to improve the user experience of the Web when
accessed from such devices."

However, it seems that the document is concentrating mainly on authoring
process. As we can change the existing Web very slowly, it would be
informative for non-mobile Web experts to illustrate already existing
Web to Mobile adaptation processes, which are based on proxy based
conversion. These conversion proxies provide the most widest Web to
Mobile resource today.

Here are some examples which kind of proxies i mean:

WEB TO MOBILE

Google's quite new HTML -> XHTML MP converter:
<http://www.google.com/gwt/n?&u=www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-mobile-bp-20060113/>
MWBP document (WAI) conversion as an example. This converter can handle
even forms.

<http://mini.opera.com> (Opera Software MIDP browser based on proxy
adaptation. This combination enhances site and browser usability)

HTML-> WML conversion
<http://wap.google.com>
<http://maddingue.free.fr/softwares/html2wml.html> (handles forms also)

Maybe it should explained more clearly, why WAI guidelines - for example
- do not cater mobile devices enough. In my opinion, different kind of
Web to Mobile proxies should be studied in the future working groups -
especially with content conforming relevant (and existing) WAI guidelines.

It is said, that the mobile handset can be the only Web device for many
users in the third world. That is why it is important to note, that
conversion proxies might be someties the only way to get information
from the Web.

Kind Regards,
Mr. Ville Karinen
Student (Agr. & For.)
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-370
Commenter: Bruno von Niman (ANEC W3C) <ANEC_W3CRep_Bruno@vonniman.com> on behalf of ANEC (archived message)
Context: Document as a whole
Not assigned
Resolution status:

Setup and configuration is currently considered by consumers as a major difficulty,
when trying to access mobile services and applications. As this document does not
address setup and configuration-specific issues and it does not provide such
guidelines, it should reference available recommendations and best practices
developed in other standard bodies and fora, in order to improve the user experience.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-267
Commenter: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> (archived message)
Context: 1.3.3 One Web
Not assigned
Resolution status:

"From the perspective of this document this means that services should be available as some variant of HTML over HTTP."

Why is the previous statement here? It sounds like it is an assumption about delivery and belongs in the next section.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-358
Commenter: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com> on behalf of Opera Software (archived message)
Context: 1.4 Default Delivery Context
Not assigned
Resolution status:

3. Security

In order to build commercial services on the web, secure connections are
necessary. In addition, these are widely implemented already. Is there no
requirement to support https connections in the mobile space as a best
practice?
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-359
Commenter: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com> on behalf of Opera Software (archived message)
Context: 1.4 Default Delivery Context
Not assigned
Resolution status:

4. HTTP

It is not clear that any transport protocol is guaranteed on the device.
Given the requirements to support the regular web, and in particular such
things as 30x HTTP responses, it would be appropriate to specify a level
of HTTP support in the default characteristics. mobile space as a best
practice?
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-360
Commenter: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com> on behalf of Opera Software (archived message)
Context: 1.4 Default Delivery Context
Not assigned
Resolution status:

5. Style sheets

XHTML Basic does not include any support for internal styles. It makes
sense, given the problems of latency that are a key constraint in the
mobile space, to mandate support for internal styling, but it is not clear
from the current wording what support can be expected (and therefore, as
an implementor, what support we are implicitly being required to provide).
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-398
Commenter: Zev Blut <zb@ubit.com> (archived message)
Context: 1.4 Default Delivery Context
Not assigned
Resolution status:

1.4 Default Delivery Context
There is an entry for screen width, but not height. I think that there
should be some value for a default screen height.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-357
Commenter: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com> on behalf of Opera Software (archived message)
Context: 1.4 Default Delivery Context
Not assigned
Resolution status:

2. Colours:

There are a number of interpretations of "websafe" colours - please
provide a reference that unambiguously states which colours are expected
to be available.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-421
Commenter: <fsasaki@w3.org> on behalf of I18N WG (archived message)
Context: 2.2 Input
Not assigned
Resolution status:

Comment from the i18n review of:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-mobile-bp-20060113/

Comment 6
At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0602-mwbp10/
Editorial/substantive: S
Owner: FS
Location in reviewed document:
Sec. 2.2 [http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-mobile-bp-20060113/#iddiv2102172624]

Comment:

We propose to add to this section on \"input\" the requirement to provide an adequate input method for the user. Especially for complex scripts like Chinese or Japanese, this is a crucial requirement.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-399
Commenter: Zev Blut <zb@ubit.com> (archived message)
Context: 2.2 Input
Not assigned
Resolution status:

2.2 Input
Discusses the potential lack of back button support, but in section 1.4
the default device supports XHTML- Basic. Is it not reasonable that if
the default is assuming XHTML-Basic then the target default handsets
have back buttons?
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-422
Commenter: <fsasaki@w3.org> on behalf of I18N WG (archived message)
Context: 2.3 Bandwidth and Cost
Not assigned
Resolution status:

Comment from the i18n review of:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-mobile-bp-20060113/

Comment 7
At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0602-mwbp10/
Editorial/substantive: E
Owner: FS
Location in reviewed document:
Sec.2.3 [http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-mobile-bp-20060113/#iddiv2102173616]

Comment:

In some character encodings like UTF-8, scripts with a similar number of characters (e.g. latin versus indic scripts) vary in space requirements. To avoid high bandwidth / cost related to scripts, you might propose for such cases the use of the
compression scheme for unicode [http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr6/]
.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-277
Commenter: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> (archived message)
Context: 2.7 Advantages
Not assigned
Resolution status:

"As an illustration of some of these factors: First, unlike the fixed Web, the mobile Web will go where you go. No longer will you have to remember to do something on the Web when you get back to your computer. You can do it immediately, within the context that made you want to use the Web in the first place."

The previous paragraph needs to be adjusted. The text (which may have come initially from the Communications Team!) suggests that there are two Webs: one fixed and one mobile. That is not a message we want to communicate. The point is that we want one Web and that we want to improve mobile access to it.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 101-120 121-140 141-160 161-171

Add a comment.


Developed and maintained by Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (dom@w3.org).
$Id: Overview.php,v 1.46 2013-10-04 08:11:33 dom Exp $
Please send bug reports and request for enhancements to w3t-sys.org