[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004 webl

• To: "Robin Berjon" <robin.berjon@e...>
• Subject: Re: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004 weblog items?)
• From: "Bill Kearney" <wkearney@s...>
• Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 12:37:49 -0500
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• Organization: http://www.ideaspace.net/users/wkearney/foaf.xrdf
• References: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D102767165@R...> <41A753A0.60909@e...> <01ce01c4d3d3$90aa5a20$200ca8c0@w...> <41A7629B.8060001@e...>

> Hmm, sure, in fact that's probably in a nutshell the summary of the
> Mobile Web Initiative workshop that took place last week.

Yeah, sorry to restate the obvious then.

> But don't worry, the incentive to get much better content than that on
> mobile devices is extremely high (and in part already there for those in
> the least mobile-retarded areas of the planet). I'm talking about what
> happens when that content grows much, much more, knowing that that's soon.

I think what's been missing has been content being accessible in the
task-oriented fashion a user on a cell-phone or other resource-deprived
device user would grasp wanting to tolerate using.  All too often it seems
like it ends up being little more than "I wish I had a real desktop but
since all I've got is this phone..." and that's just not a compelling way to
build repeat users.

That and the carriers taking the 'gouge you at every possible chance' fee
structures just haven't made it anywhere NEAR what the users would tolerate
as an on-going exercise.

So while there may be tons of 'incentive' to make content accessible until
it's the user that's motivated to seek using it on a repeating basis it's a
non-starter.  Their idea (the paying user) of incentive isn't being
nickled-and-dimed to death to get crappy content through an even crappier
interface.  That it is or isn't stingy with bandwidth/airtime is even less
of a factor.

-Bill

• References:
  • RE: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004 weblog items?)
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
  • Re: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004weblog items?)
    • From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>
  • Re: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004 weblog items?)
    • From: "Bill Kearney" <wkearney@s...>
  • Re: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004weblog items?)
    • From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004weblog items?)
• Next by Date: Re: Re: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML2004 weblog items?)
• Previous by thread: Re: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004weblog items?)
• Next by thread: RE: XML schema -- specify a relationship between attributes?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread