Looks like I timed my post well - .mobi announced yesterday that is now officially happening. What I'd like to know is why a non-profit(?) feels $10m and 25 staff is necessary to manage a top level domain!

Read what Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the Web and founding director of the w3c http://www.w3.org/2004/Talks/0519-tbl-keynote/slide8-1.html 

Does anyone here have an opinion on this as it will affect everyone on this forum in the future.

On 23:59:36 4 July 2005 PaulWalsh wrote:

I am an advocate of initiatives that encourage device independence and platform agnostic whilst ensuring products and services are easily accessible to everyone irrespective of location or disability. However I seem to have great difficulty in seeing the benefit of creating yet another top level domain to help deliver any of these ideologies and if that’s the case, then what’s the point in having it?

What’s the problem being addressed?
World Wide Web technologies have become the key enablers for access to the Internet through desktop and notebook computing platforms. Web technologies have the potential to play the same role for Internet access from mobile devices. However, today, mobile Web access suffers from interoperability and usability problems that make the Web difficult to use for most mobile phone subscribers.

How does .mobi propose to address this problem?
.mobi is a new top level domain that has been created for the mobile community to promote the use of simplified websites for mobile devices. The investors of this new domain offering include Microsoft, Nokia, Vodafone, 3, GSMA, HP, Orange, Samsung, Sun, TIM, T-Mobile and Ericsson. NB there are no ISPs or browsers sponsoring this initiative, nor is the w3c backing it - in fact Tim Berners-Lee believes it will segment the Internet. So, if you want mobile users to surf your site, the .mobi people want you to use this domain instead of just making sure your current site with its current domain, supports mobile surfing. What a great idea for a non-profit organisation to make money and spend it where they want to - this isn't the first I've witnessed this business model.

What’s the alternative to .mobi?
W3C’s "Mobile Web Initiative” (W3C MWI) proposes to address these issues through a concerted effort of key players in the mobile production chain, including authoring tool vendors, content providers, handset manufacturers, browser vendors and mobile operators – i.e. everyone.
Currently, the MWI is focussing on developing "best practices" and a trustmark for websites (working name: "mobileOK"), work on device information needed for content adaptation, and marketing and outreach activities.

Why I don’t agree with the .mobi concept
It has been proven time and time again that the vast majority of people (don’t have the stats to hand) google the term or company they are looking for. That is, most people who visit sites such as ebay type the word ebay into the search engine even though it’s obvious that the url is www.ebay.com (or country specific).

People find it difficult enough to remember simple URLs, so by introducing yet another top level domain I think it will confuse people even further.

More importantly, the MWI’s mission is to encourage the concept of ‘one web’ by using best practises and open standards. Although it will be impossible to create just one website that renders perfectly on all access points such as PC, PDAs and mobile devices without the need for some content adaptation, the concept should be encouraged nevertheless. In other words, web authors should create a website with the assumption that visitors may use a PC, mobile device or other means to access the site - so the site should establish what the access point is and render the content accordingly. It’s actually quiet easy.

Dan,

Thanks for your feedback. Unfortunately there isn't anything that can be done as the contract has been signed with ICANN. The w3c in particular raised its concerns but now that .mobi is a reality they have been welcomed by the w3c Mobile Web Initiative (MWI) as industry collaboration is always in the best interests of the consumer. As you state, device independence, browser agnostic and platform neutrality are all terms we should be gearing towards - although we have some way to go before one website will render correctly across all (or at least the vast majority) platforms and devices without the need for content adaptation, we are heading in the right direction. I must say however, that there will always be a need for content adaptation where websites need to be tailored for a pleasant user experience on very small screens – the trick is to realise the difference between the two scenarios to ensure we try to achieve ‘one web’.

On 13:08:54 13 July 2005 Dan Zambonini wrote:

Thanks for pointing this out - hadn't seen this.  It seems absolutely ridiculous, as you say.  I can see us ending up with '.pc' '.mac' or maybe even '.mozilla-version-1.4.2' top level domains if this continues.

What must be really frustrating for people like TBL is that the web/HTTP has had 'content negotation' built into it right from the start, to make sure issues like this didn't arise.  We've always had the ability to server up different content to different platforms depending on their request headers.

What can we do about it?