W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > July 2009

RE: MWABP: Revised text for Device Capability Detection.

From: Rotan Hanrahan <rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:31:51 +0100
Message-ID: <D5306DC72D165F488F56A9E43F2045D301FA599C@FTO.mobileaware.com>
To: <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Cc: <Sailesh.Sathish@nokia.com>, <edward.mitukiewicz@orange-ftgroup.com>
Thanks for the update. Unfortunately, as per the recent minutes [1],
BPWG has decided that neither DCCI nor OMA DPE merit being included as
Best Practices. The lack of widespread adoption appears to be the
problem (unavoidable with new technologies). Perhaps BPWG might consider
some permanent page (wiki perhaps?) where they could keep a list of
interesting technologies to consider, which may in time become
candidates for future updates of the Best Practices.

---Rotan

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Jun/0143.html


-----Original Message-----
From: Sailesh.Sathish@nokia.com [mailto:Sailesh.Sathish@nokia.com] 
Sent: 01 July 2009 09:02
To: edward.mitukiewicz@orange-ftgroup.com; Rotan Hanrahan;
jrabin@mtld.mobi
Cc: adamconnors@google.com; casays@yahoo.com; public-bpwg@w3.org
Subject: RE: MWABP: Revised text for Device Capability Detection.


Thank you Edward, Rotan. Nothing more to add except that the
implementations of 
DCCI were Firefox based (Nokia- MicroB on Maemo platform). Applications
access
properties through DCCI JS extensions. Implementations + appl
demonstrated LBS
based mashups (both FT and Nokia).

br,

Sailesh 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ext edward.mitukiewicz@orange-ftgroup.com 
>[mailto:edward.mitukiewicz@orange-ftgroup.com] 
>Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 5:36 PM
>To: rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.com; jrabin@mtld.mobi
>Cc: adamconnors@google.com; casays@yahoo.com; 
>public-bpwg@w3.org; Sathish Sailesh (Nokia-NRC/Tampere)
>Subject: RE: MWABP: Revised text for Device Capability Detection.
>
>Hello Rotan,
>Hello Jo,
>
>FWIW two interoperable DCCI implementations have been 
>completed and tested [1] by Nokia and Orange Labs about a year 
>ago - see also DCCI test suite and test results [2] for these 
>two implementations.
>
>Cheers
>-EdM
> 
>[1] 
>http://www.w3.org/2007/uwa/editors-drafts/DeliveryContextClient
>Interface/2008-08-13/ir/
>[2] 
>http://www.w3.org/2007/uwa/editors-drafts/DeliveryContextClient
Interface/2008-08-13/ir/tests/test_index.html
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org 
>[mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Rotan Hanrahan
>Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 5:23 AM
>To: Jo Rabin
>Cc: Adam Connors; Eduardo Casais; Mobile Web Best Practices 
>Working Group WG; Sailesh.Sathish@nokia.com
>Subject: RE: MWABP: Revised text for Device Capability Detection.
>
>Jo,
>
>I am not an authority on the implementation status of DCCI, 
>but Sailesh (copied) may be able to comment.
>
>As for implementations of OMA DPE, I think our colleagues 
>within OMA should be able to comment on that.
>
>In keeping with the scope of the BP document, the likelihood 
>of these technologies becoming widely adopted in the field 
>needs to be considered. However, we may have a chicken-and-egg 
>situation, insofar as this BP document may itself be the 
>inspiration for the adoption of the technologies.
>
>A compromise, whereby these nascent practices are mentioned 
>(but not necessarily endorsed) would do the community a good 
>service, and may also spur the supporters of the technologies 
>to put more effort into ensuring their successful completion. 
>To ignore them could hurry their demise, and deny the 
>community the potential benefits.
>
>---Rotan.
>


[...]
Received on Wednesday, 1 July 2009 08:32:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:43:01 UTC