Another new feature is their "stats" feature. I posted a comment earlier today when I saw it in my Sitemaps account area:

http://blogoscoped.com/forum/10067.html

I've just noticed that they've got a Sitemaps blog too. Not sure how new it is, but I've never seen it before: http://sitemaps.blogspot.com/

I really think that mobile pages should differ from thier larger counterparts significantly; the methods of distributing information are fundamentally different. nobody wants to read large amounts of text on a phone/pda

Caleb, what makes you think so?

I sometimes want to read only quick information on the desktop (e.g. when I have 5 minutes at work), but when I'm in the train and I browse sites with my phone (Nokia 6600), I have about 20 minutes to spend – and I read much longer texts!

Even for those who don't read on their mobile screen because they find it too small, bigger screens are about to come, and we don't want to create another copy of the web whenever the medium changes.

One more thing to consider: I'm not saying accessibility in terms of web standards is easy. In fact it follows the "lazy" KISS principle; the more you do, the more harm you can do. If you look at my blog, for example, you can see in the source the navigation is *below* the content. Why am I doing this? So that the page will linearize neatly, and that if you're looking at it bare-bones without a CSS on the mobile phone, you will not need to scroll through pages of navigation.

Am I saying the mobile web should have exactly the same users, and the same user behavior? No – far from it. I think the two differ substantially because of available screen size. E.g. I wouldn't type this reply to your comment if I was on the train (not because I couldn't, I did it before in this forum), it's not worth it on the mobile key-pad... too slow.
But many other types of online activities are possible, and we limit ourselves if we say "visitors don't want this or that on this or that medium."
Why not give it to visitors, and see what bonus they get out of it? In fact, a little consideration for cross-media might result in an overall gain for all media (even the desktop) – because your pages may become less cluttered.

By the way, I know that far from every page can be browsed on mobile hand phones; many, many web authors don't consider the W3C and their accessibility guidelines. The only thing that I find really strange is when people *do* care, and create new standards (like WML was, or Google Mobile Sitemaps is now) just to make something work that could work by sticking to good ole HTML... it's the "they don't get it" part that risks destroying a really great idea by Tim Berners-Lee.

ahh, but the problem is that your page is much simpler than the average page out there. but you have convinced me that its important to give users the option to see the full page, that does make sense. and i also agree that stylesheets need to collapse nicely; once when i went to wired thier stylesheet and image server had been for some reason blocked by my school's firewall but the site was still very functional.

and the other problem i have is that im charged by the KB when i dl stuff on my phone. so smaller is better in that respect.