Posted on February 20, 2007 at 6:31 pm | 
By 
Triggered by a discussion on a W3C Mobile Web Initiative (MWI) email thread, I wrote a post yesterday which sparked huge debate (43 comments and counting).
Basically one of the participants of the group, Luca Passani, complained about the group using the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) as a starting point for creating the MWI Best Practices document.
It was almost impossible to get across to Luca, that only relevant WCAG stuff was used. The group meticulously reviewed each checkpoint on conference calls and by email until it had exhausted each one. We then added best practices that were specific to mobile.
The conversation digressed into ‘why should we try to make everything accessible to disabled people anyway’. Nobody actually made such a claim in the first place and the conversation started to loose track as it did in my post. In fact, it’s still going on now so I’d like to take it to this post (if it hasn’t already died). Thanks to everyone who has contributed so far.
The post appears to be attracting attention from Luca’s corner of the world. That is, mobile developers who build WAP sites (and other types of mobile related applications). These are very qualified comments so I’m not putting them down in any way. I’m simply highlighting that the conversation needs to be balanced. I think this can be achieved by soliciting feedback from people who wish to see the desktop Web realised on more devices such as mobile phones. Apple and Nokia appear to think it will happen soon.
So, a little background to the MWI
The principal objective of the MWI Best Practice document is to improve the user experience of the Web when accessed from mobile devices.
It is primarily directed at creators, maintainers and operators of Web sites. Readers of this document are expected to be familiar with the creation of Web sites, and to have a general familiarity with the technologies involved, such as Web servers and HTTP.Readers are not expected to have a background in mobile-specific technologies.
So, the MWI is not about encouraging more WAP sites, or any other type of content that is specific to mobile devices and which doesn’t work on other devices such as desktop computers. People who wish to develop such content can do so. So there’s no need to slate the MWI though.
Luca and I violently disagree when it comes to the future of the Web on mobile devices. In short, Luca believes that WAP is the way forward. Or at least, something that is created specific for mobile devices only.
My view, is actually more along the lines of what Tim Berners-Lee wants to see happen (although I’m not speaking on his behalf). I could be wrong, but at least I’m in good company. I believe we should bring the Web as everyone knows it today, to mobile.
Naturally, you can’t just browse the Web on a mobile phone and expect a great experience ‘today’. But we should look to enable it as best we can by delivering content that is a contextual representation of the device accessing it. This will be enabled through standardised mobile browsers, Web enabled mobile devices, cheaper tarriffs and of course, best practices design techniques for developers.
- The number of people without access to the Web is greater than the number who do.
- Most of these people are in developing countries.
- Developing countries are more likely to use mobile as the primary access device for the Web as it’s cheaper than rolling out a fix line network.
- People in developing countries don’t give a toss about the weather or travel information as suggested by just about every mobile ‘expert’ I speak with or listen to. The world is bigger than Slough. And not every train goes from Slough to London.
However, there will *always* be a use case for mobile specific applications. I simply want to promote the Web so it can be accessed by anyone irrespective of their ability, device or location.
That doesn’t mean that every Web site must be accessible to everyone all of the time. It’s about best endeavours.
What do you think? Are you happy to continue using WAP sites or would you like to see better mobile devices, cheaper tariffs and best practices that help developers build mobile friendly Web sites?
When you go into a phone shop as I did recently and ask for a Web enabled phone, do you want to be handed a handset that only supports a list of WAP sites that the operator wants you to access? Or, like me, do you want to browse the Web on a mobile (assume for a second that it’s free) in the future?
I’d love to hear what you think, whether you agree with me or not, of course 
45 Comments
So far,
February 20, 2007 @ 
Paul Littlebury
W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines are a set of common sense rules, and I applaud this move as a general philosophy of web design. Though disability is main driver behind the guidelines, the guidelines also enable a best practice in design and usability. Would any project manager disagree with those aims?
In QA, we have to suffer a few years of chaotic web application development, and tidying up the mess left behind. A cruel generalization, but it is common (bad) practice, in effort to get sites up and running to impossible deadlines. Separating out mobile as somehow unique in this drive, has never been further from the truth than now. I have been out of the mobile arena for couple years, but my recent experience with handhelds highlights the fact that it is becoming irrelevant what device you are viewing a website from - what does matter is the extent of your audience. Limiting your audience, is preventing you from seeing outside what you percieve as “your market”.
Even in technology we see fear of progress of change, especially when it fuels a paranoia about excessive control. Development should be a creative endeavor, but it also needs to be tempered with technical and business realities. WAP provided a means to create sites for display on devices that struggled with traditional website applications.
This is now not the case - whether I access a site via mobile or PC or my PSP, I want to have a easy to navigate site, that displays professionally. I don’t care (as a user) what troubles a company is having getting their bloated sites to conform to standards. If I cant get to the site, or it looks shoddy, or prompts me to download numerous plugins, and the updates - you wont see me on your site again. I am sure I am not alone with that attitude.