Edit comment LC-1635 for Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group

Quick access to LC-1578 LC-1579 LC-1580 LC-1581 LC-1582 LC-1583 LC-1585 LC-1586 LC-1587 LC-1588 LC-1589 LC-1591 LC-1592 LC-1593 LC-1594 LC-1596 LC-1597 LC-1598 LC-1599 LC-1600 LC-1601 LC-1602 LC-1604 LC-1605 LC-1606 LC-1607 LC-1608 LC-1609 LC-1610 LC-1611 LC-1612 LC-1613 LC-1614 LC-1615 LC-1616 LC-1617 LC-1618 LC-1619 LC-1620 LC-1621 LC-1622 LC-1623 LC-1624 LC-1625 LC-1626 LC-1627 LC-1628 LC-1629 LC-1630 LC-1631 LC-1632 LC-1633 LC-1634 LC-1635 LC-1636 LC-1637 LC-1638 LC-1639 LC-1640 LC-1641 LC-1642 LC-1643 LC-1644 LC-1645 LC-1646 LC-1647 LC-1648 LC-1649 LC-1650 LC-1651 LC-1652 LC-1653 LC-1654 LC-1655 LC-1656 LC-1658 LC-1659 LC-1660 LC-1661 LC-1662 LC-1663 LC-1664

Comment LC-1635

Comment Shortname:

Commenter: Micah Dubinko <mdubinko@yahoo.com>

Message-id:

Section of the document concerned:

[Free text description]Document as a wholeW3C mobileOK Basic Tests 1.0 Abstract Status of this Document Table of Contents 1 Introduction 1.1 Levels of mobileOK 1.1.1 mobileOK Basic 1.1.2 mobileOK 1.1.3 Out of Scope 1.1.4 Beyond mobileOK 1.2 Applicability 1.3 Claiming mobileOK conformance 2 Conformance 2.1 Validity of the Tests 2.2 Testing Outcomes 2.3 Conduct of Tests 2.3.1 Order of Tests 2.3.2 HTTP Request 2.3.3 HTTP Response 2.3.4 CSS Style 2.3.5 Included Resources 2.3.6 Included Stylesheet Resources 2.3.7 Visible Linked Resources 3 mobileOK Basic Tests 3.1 AUTO_REFRESH (partial) and REDIRECTION 3.2 CACHING 3.3 CHARACTER_ENCODING_SUPPORT and CHARACTER_ENCODING_USE 3.4 CONTENT_FORMAT_SUPPORT 3.5 DEFAULT_INPUT_MODE 3.6 EXTERNAL_RESOURCES 3.7 GRAPHICS_FOR_SPACING 3.8 IMAGE_MAPS 3.9 IMAGES_RESIZING and IMAGES_SPECIFY_SIZE 3.10 LINK_TARGET_FORMAT 3.11 MEASURES 3.12 MINIMIZE 3.13 NO_FRAMES 3.14 NON-TEXT_ALTERNATIVES (partial) 3.15 OBJECTS_OR_SCRIPT (partial) 3.16 PAGE_SIZE_LIMIT 3.17 PAGE_TITLE (partial) 3.18 POP_UPS 3.19 PROVIDE_DEFAULTS (partial) 3.20 SCROLLING (partial) 3.21 STYLE_SHEETS_SUPPORT (partial) 3.22 STYLE_SHEETS_USE 3.23 TABLES_ALTERNATIVES 3.24 TABLES_LAYOUT (partial) 3.25 TABLES_NESTED 3.26 VALID_MARKUP A Acknowledgements (Non-Normative) B References (Non-Normative) C Best Practices' Relation to mobileOK Tests (Non-Normative)
or

Refinement of the section concerned:

Status:

open proposal pending resolved_yes resolved_no resolved_partial other assigned to Nobody

Type: substantive editorial typo question general comment undefined

Resolution status:

Response drafted Resolution implemented Reply sent to commenter

Response status:

No response from Commenter yet Commenter approved disposition Commenter objected to disposition
Commenter's response (URI):

Comment:

Overall impression

The overall impression the tests give me is that, given a non-whitelisted device, the safer alternative is to exclude all CSS. This seems like the wrong impression to give mobile developers.

Related issues: (space separated ids)

WG Notes:

Resolution: No we don't see how the document supports this interpretation. The only tests related to CSS styles are: MEASURES: This test set a restriction on using only relative measures of length. STYLE_SHEETS_SUPPORT: This tests searches properties such as position, display or float getting a warning in the worst case. In addition, a human test should verify if the page is readable without style sheet. STYLE_SHEETS_USE: This test looks for elements not supported in XHTML Basic. From these tests, we think that you cannot infer that the safer alternative is to exclude all CSS. It is only STYLE_SHEETS_SUPPORT which recommends that a page should be readable without style sheets, which is really helpful in devices not supporting them or just configured by the user in order to not use them.

(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)