W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > May 2008

RE: ISSUE-253 (Incoming SMS): Binding to Incoming SMS from Script [Mobile Web Applications Best Practices]

From: Sullivan, Bryan <BS3131@att.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 13:46:21 -0700
Message-ID: <8080D5B5C113E940BA8A461A91BFFFCD09B3F1BF@BD01MSXMB015.US.Cingular.Net>
To: "Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group WG" <public-bpwg@w3.org>

Jo,
The basic question here is not one of platform or what is supported by
one platform or another re binding to a particular push bearer (SMS
being just one). There are widely supported standards for application
binding to SMS as event triggers, and vendor-specific API's supporting
tbe binding of applications (which can include web applications) to SMS
send/receive. 

Like most things in mobiles, diversity is a key factor here, and support
does vary. But we are not avoiding other mobility-specific aspects
because support varies or the API/methods or supporting platforms that
vendors offer vary. We should be equitable in how we consider things as
best practices, and not focus on the platforms, but the
methods/practices themselves. Developers will always need to educate
themselves re the particular platform's support for best practices we
recommend.

The basic question is whether W3C wants to view the "Mobile Web" with
glasses polarized to filter out anything that is not widely deployed on
desktop browsers, as the definition of "web" to be inherited as the
"Mobile Web". If it does so, it will ignore the unique characteristics
of the mobile environment that make services so different/compelling
(and the needs for service enablers also different). Push methodology
(whether via OMA Push or SMS binding) is one of those unique
characteristics.

Note also that Push will not be unique to mobile for long: work is
nearing completion on extending OMA Push to SIP environments (I chair
the OMA working group leading this effort), thus the wired web will also
benefit from a standardized Push technology in the near future.

In the meantime it remains one of the key differentiators of the mobile
web environment, that should have a prominent place in BP2. Whether it
is possible to bind to SMS from Javascript is just one facet/approach of
implementation, that will likely itself vary from device to device.

Side note: re the comment "CMN: Push isn't in "Web" browsers - full
internet as opposed to WAP browsers"
- Push is supported by many "full internet" or "full web" browsers that
are deployed on mobile devices; many services depend upon this and it
would not make sense for vendors to ignore the Push Client integration
work. 

Best regards,
Bryan Sullivan | AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Issue Tracker
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 11:57 AM
To: public-bpwg@w3.org
Subject: ISSUE-253 (Incoming SMS): Binding to Incoming SMS from Script
[Mobile Web Applications Best Practices]


ISSUE-253 (Incoming SMS): Binding to Incoming SMS from Script [Mobile
Web Applications Best Practices]

http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/issues/

Raised by: Jo Rabin
On product: Mobile Web Applications Best Practices

My ACTION-690 has me raising this issue. The question arose as follows:

5.5.3 - Push

    BS: Push is widely deployed in networks. As a way to do event-based
    delivery instead of polling you could use it to minimise network
    traffic

    CMN: It's in WAP browsers

    BS: Almost every phone browser is a WAP browser, and they
    implemented push

    CMN: Push isn't in "Web" browsers - full internet as opposed to WAP
    browsers

    JR: There are two cases here... on the one hand WAP push and on the
    other hand application binding to incoming SMS to generate event
    based behavior

    BS: There is a problem of education. There is no generic way to bind
    SMS to an application, and that would be a proprietary
    implementation detail.

    JR: ..."if the device supports it".

    BS: The only standard method I know of is MIDP registry.

    JR: To my mind there is a distinction between WAP push and bindings
    on information pushed to an application. Maybe more information is
    needed...

    BS: We haven't said that MIDP-based browsers are not in scope...

    CMN: No. But I think it is clear that MIDP-based stuff is not
    readily within the scope of Web stuff - it is a particualr platform,
    in the same way that ActiveX relies ona aprticular platform, rather
    than being a general Web technology.

    JR: Think we need some more research to look at this... would
    someone like to take an Action?

    [pregnant silence]

    <jo> ACTION: JR to raise Issue as to availability of binding to
    incoming SMS from script [recorded in
    [70]http://www.w3.org/2008/03/04-bpwg-minutes.html#action03]

    <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-690 - Raise Issue as to availability of
    binding to incoming SMS from script [on Jo Rabin - due 2008-03-11].
Received on Thursday, 22 May 2008 20:47:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:42:58 UTC