Ren wrote:
> DoCoMo adopted cHTML because it met the needs of contents creators.
I am not trying to get into an argument over this, but Ren you've written it
quite a bit and I'm just wondering what the source of this information is.
Discussions you've had with them? Stuff you've read? The thing that I find
strange is that at the beginning, when DoCoMo were planning this service,
there were no "content creators" for any mobile services. And the companies
they were getting to put up content were banks and such, and I would have
thought that with all the larger technical issues involved, such as
security, the issue of whether the mark-up language was simple cHTML or WML
would have been relatively minor. Or were DoCoMo really looking that far
forward with expectations of all the "katte" site developers getting on the
bandwagon? I somehow doubt this. Today, of course, we can see how successful
the service is, but back when it was being planned it could not have been
such a certainty.
Is it possible that NTT DoCoMo went with Access' proposal because it was a
domestic one (I know I'm on dangerous ground here, but when has NTT used
anything that was from the outside?? PDC is a case in point. The whole world
uses GSM and Japan is the only one with PDC and PHS.) And my understanding
is that Access Japan's proposal to the W3C was the first ever to come from
Japan. (Probably not relevant).
Anyway, I would appreciate some clarification on this focus on content
creators.
Thanks.
Brent
-------------------------------------
Brent Bossom
brentbossom@mac.com
mobile: 090-4427-7255
-------------------------------------
Received on Wed Aug 16 12:42:54 2000