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

Re: DeviceDescriptionStructuresUseCases Use cases

From: Andrea Trasatti <andrea@trasatti.it>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:12:56 +0200
Message-Id: <5001A018-5594-4D9B-B4EB-82A94F00142E@trasatti.it>
Cc: public-ddwg@w3.org
To: José Manuel Cantera Fonseca <jmcf@tid.es>

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 Friday, 30 March 2007 13:13:17 UTC

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