W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ddwg@w3.org > April 2007

Re: DeviceDescriptionStructuresUseCases Use cases

From: Rafael Casero <rcasero@satec.es>
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 16:52:39 +0200
Message-ID: <461118B7.8040403@satec.es>
To: José Manuel Cantera Fonseca <jmcf@tid.es>
CC: public-ddwg@w3.org

Hi Jose,

the last Use Case in the wiki, 'Device Description Provisioning?, is it 
intended for provisioning devices into a DDR? or do you mean the 
provisioning in a, for instance, game portal?



-------- Mensaje Original --------
> Andrea,
> Your suggestions are now in the Wiki [1]. I think we need to refine 
> the content, but as an starting point is not bad.
> Comments from the rest of the group are welcome
> Best regards
> [1] 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/DDWG/wiki/DeviceDescriptionStructuresUseCases
> Andrea Trasatti escribió:
>> I suggest to change the title of the use-case. Current title is 
>> "Special content adaptation for a family of devices", I would suggest 
>> to change it into: "Mobile web content adaptation for a family of 
>> devices".
>> Then I'd like to create a new use-case as follows.
>> Title:"Application develompent for a family of devices"
>> Content:"When developing an application for example with J2ME or 
>> Symbian, it is often useful to create different builds for different 
>> devices or use different API's to exploit the device capabilities, 
>> namely 3D hardware acceleration, stereo speakers, bluetooth chips, 
>> GPS support and more. In order to do this, developers might have to 
>> create 1 build for each device on the market. Many devices actually 
>> share the same functionalities and support the same API's. Developing 
>> and testing on a device often means supporting a range of devices. 
>> Companies in this space will get great advantage from the ability to 
>> build a family of devices that matches similar specifications."
>> Also, as a followup and reviewing the text of the use-case 1, I would 
>> also suggest to remove the ending part, which is: "Four months later, 
>> Mike needs to develop a new application and suffers the same problem 
>> as John. As Mike is a careful developer, and doesn't like reinventing 
>> the wheel, instead of creating a new device family, he queries the 
>> DDR, and realizes that there is a device family that suits his needs. 
>> So he reuse that family of devices and references it in his own 
>> application."
>> And I suggest we create 2 new use-cases to demonstrate how the 
>> exchange of family definitions can be used.
>> New use-case a:
>> title: "Common definition of device family for mobile web content 
>> adaptation"
>> Text: "Company A wants to develop a new application and would like to 
>> provide different layout and content to different groups of devices. 
>> As company A  doesn't like reinventing the wheel, instead of creating 
>> a new device family, queries the DDR, and realizes that there is a 
>> device family that suits its needs as defined by company B who is 
>> working in the same space. Company A can consistently reuse that 
>> family of devices and references it in his own application.
>> New use-case b, again not in the space of the MWI DDWG, but more 
>> generally interesting for companies in the mobile space:
>> title: "Common definition and sharing of device family for content 
>> provisioning"
>> Text: "Company A is a developer of J2ME applications. Every month its 
>> QA team tests the new games against the devices they have in their 
>> lab. Devices used to testing are often considered master devices 
>> representing a number of other devices that will not be tested 
>> directly. Also, every month, the company lab buys new devices, old 
>> games are tested against these devices for compatibility.
>> Company B is a content aggregator. Every month receives from 
>> different software developers a number of new games. Company B also 
>> keeps updates their device database so every month new devices are 
>> added.
>> Every month Company A sends to Company B a list of the games and a 
>> list of the devices compatible with wach of the games provided.
>> Company B needs to go back and check the list of devices and games 
>> every month for each of the games developers.
>> The ability of using a common API between Company B and each of its 
>> affiliate games developers would ease the work on a daily basis and 
>> make sure that all the devices that are certified to work with a 
>> certain game are up-to-date".
>> - Andrea
>> Il giorno 28/mar/07, alle ore 16:53, José Manuel Cantera Fonseca ha 
>> scritto:
>>> Hi,
>>> Trying to summarize, what is your current proposal? To extend use 
>>> case 2?
>>> Cheers
>>> Andrea Trasatti escribió:
>>>> If that is the case, then I think that this should be extended to 
>>>> the existing use-case 2 which is more of a "marketing" grouping of 
>>>> devices rather than for the mobile web.
>>>> Since the group is not going to actually define any families, but 
>>>> simply defining the API's by which an "extended-DDR" can manage 
>>>> device grouping, I don't see the need to say which use-cases are 
>>>> out of scope. As long as the DDR supports the basic API's and the 
>>>> "extended-DDR" supported the extra API's we will define, I don't 
>>>> see any borders to the groupings that different individuals might 
>>>> create.
>>>> I also apologies for an e-mail I sent out that was apparently 
>>>> encrypted with GPG. All I wanted to provide was a link to the page 
>>>> of the use cases, which I'll send now, 
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/DDWG/wiki/DeviceDescriptionStructuresUseCases 
>>>> - Andrea
>>>> Il giorno 28/mar/07, alle ore 13:48, Rotan Hanrahan ha scritto:
>>>>> While we are focussed in DDWG on the production of content for the 
>>>>> Web,
>>>>> we have considered the potential need in other domains and we aim 
>>>>> to be
>>>>> extensible to support other use cases. I would have no objection to
>>>>> information on the periphery of the scope of DDWG being included 
>>>>> in the
>>>>> DDWG wiki, so long as we make it clear (i.e. on the page itself) that
>>>>> this is a topic beyond our primary focus.
>>>>> Such information may be of use to the wider community, and perhaps it
>>>>> may encourage them to contribute to our core activity, which is
>>>>> primarily concerned with supporting content adaptation through the
>>>>> provision of device descriptions.
>>>>> ---Rotan.
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org 
>>>>> [mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org] On
>>>>> Behalf Of Andrea Trasatti
>>>>> Sent: 28 March 2007 12:41
>>>>> To: public-ddwg@w3.org
>>>>> Subject: DeviceDescriptionStructuresUseCases Use cases
>>>>> I was about to create a new use-case, but I think that this actually
>>>>> partially matches the already existing use-case 1.
>>>>> I am proposing a change in the text and creation of 2 use-cases OR
>>>>> the integration.
>>>>> The current use-case is focused on content adaptation for the mobile
>>>>> web and WAP. I was thinking of the ability to group devices according
>>>>> to other characteristics for example for game and application
>>>>> developers. Companies could be interested in grouping devices
>>>>> according to the supported JSR's or some hardware characteristics
>>>>> such as bluetooth, GPS, A-GPS, camera (did you see mobilized?) and so
>>>>> on.
>>>>> It is very similar to use-case one, the use of the grouping is again
>>>>> to produce a content that is suitable for a group of devices, the
>>>>> difference is that in the current test only the production of web
>>>>> pages is considered, while I'd like to extend the idea to other types
>>>>> of content such as mobile games, video, ringtones and so on.
>>>>> We could restrict the existing use-case to web and create one that is
>>>>> for applications and games and another one for media contents in
>>>>> general.
>>>>> Andrea Trasatti
>>>>> Blog: http://trasatti.blogspot.com/
>>>>> W3C invited expert
>> =================
>> Andrea Trasatti
>> cell. +39 3474112968
>> andrea@trasatti.it
>> W3C invited expert
Received on Monday, 2 April 2007 14:53:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:00:13 UTC