Re: [Messaging API based on webinos]

I agree with Jose. We have gone down this path a couple of times already (in BONDI and WAC, and DAP) and it was found that trying to have "one messaging API to rule them all" is tempting but ultimately too functionally warping to the needs of the individual messaging systems. Attachments and mailbox/folder management are examples of significantly divergent (or contextually irrelevant) functions.

DAP ended up punting the whole API effort to the existing URI schemes. For SMS, that seems to work well (at least if you assume the user has to approve sending the message through the default messaging client, ie you forget automated sending) but it fails miserably for anything else.

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan

On Jan 3, 2013, at 7:28 AM, "JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA" <jmcf@tid.es<mailto:jmcf@tid.es>> wrote:

Hi there,

Along the lines of these discussions I was wondering if it really makes sense to have a unique (one to rule them all) API for messaging or to have  different APIs for different messaging protocols and technologies. The more I think on the issue the more I'm convinced that it is a better idea to have separate specs. The reasons for doing so are:

A/ It is easier to get Conformance and to test implementation interoperability
B/ It is easier to get consensus from the Community and to have the domain experts focused on the specific API
C/ It is easier both for developers and for implementors
D/ There are many differences between the different technologies and protocols that cannot be addressed in a single API that could make sense

So IMHO the group should be focusing initially on the most simple which is text messaging and later think on other more complicated stuff

Thanks, best

De: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc<mailto:jonas@sicking.cc>>
Fecha: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:45:05 -0800
Para: "Nilsson, Claes1" <Claes1.Nilsson@sonymobile.com<mailto:Claes1.Nilsson@sonymobile.com>>
CC: "public-sysapps@w3.org<mailto:public-sysapps@w3.org>" <public-sysapps@w3.org<mailto:public-sysapps@w3.org>>, "webinos-wp8-ml@fokus.fraunhofer.de<mailto:webinos-wp8-ml@fokus.fraunhofer.de>" <webinos-wp8-ml@fokus.fraunhofer.de<mailto:webinos-wp8-ml@fokus.fraunhofer.de>>, Christian Fuhrhop <christian.fuhrhop@fokus.fraunhofer.de<mailto:christian.fuhrhop@fokus.fraunhofer.de>>, Vercelli Stefano <stefano.vercelli@telecomitalia.it<mailto:stefano.vercelli@telecomitalia.it>>
Asunto: Re: [Messaging API based on webinos]
Nuevo envío de: <public-sysapps@w3.org<mailto:public-sysapps@w3.org>>
Fecha de nuevo envío: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 23:46:04 +0000

With both this proposal, and the proposal from Intel, I'm wondering what type of applications is the target.

As far as I can see, the email support in this API isn't enough to build for example a full-fledged email application. For that, you need IMAP support which means ability to enumerate the folder hierarchy and to query metadata about folders. You also need things like control over downloading attachments.

You likely also need integration with server-side synchronization such as ActiveSync. I don't know exactly what this entails, but at least I would imagine it requires ability to query server-side metadata similar to IMAP.

I also notice that there is no account configuration support in this API. This could be completely fine since that can be handled in a settings application on the device, separate from the email application. However I was wondering if this is something that you guys had looked into? It also seems like there needs to be some minimal amount of account management in an email API since you need to be able to enumerate which accounts are configured and be able to create UI which allows the user to choose which account to send an email with and which account to query when doing searching.

I think a lot of the same questions apply to the IM. I.e. what are the target applications for this API. It doesn't seem like there is enough there to build a chat client that integrates with for example gtalk, irc, jabber or facebook messaging as backends.

/ Jonas


On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 2:45 AM, Nilsson, Claes1 <Claes1.Nilsson@sonymobile.com<mailto:Claes1.Nilsson@sonymobile.com>> wrote:
Hi,

I have submitted an example of a Messaging API, http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps//proposals/Messaging_webinos/Messaging.HTML<http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/Messaging_webinos/Messaging.HTML>, that supports SMS, MMS, E-mail and IM based on the current Webinos Messaging API, which originally was based on the WAC Messaging API.

This API has been implemented for SMS in the Android Webinos platform.

Notes:

·        There has been a discussion, starting here http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sysapps/2012Oct/0040.html,  on whether SysApps  only should specify an SMS/MMS API and leave support for the other messaging technologies to JS libraries that use the Raw Socket API. I am not taking a specific position here. The purpose with this submission is to give an example of an API that directly provides high level support for several Messaging technologies. This example can be beneficial in further discussions on the approach on whether E-mail/IM should be supported directly by a standardized API or by JS libraries that leverage the Raw Socket API.


·        There has also been a discussion about filtering. The webinos proposal contains a MessageFilter dictionary that defines specific filtering attributes. However, a general approach to data models and filtering has been proposed, starting at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sysapps/2012Nov/0022.html, and we should probably follow such an approach for Messaging as well.


·        In this proposal traditional callback function references is used in method definitions, which differs from the style in other API proposals submitted to SysApps. They use a return type that is an interface that represents an ongoing operation. There is no specific reason for this difference in the Webinos Messaging API. If the WG decides to base the Messaging API on the Webinos example then style could be adapted to the style of the other SysApps APIs.


·        We have included a cancel() method allowing applications cancel an ongoing sendMessage or findMessage operation. This might be controversial and this kind of method is generally not included in W3C APIs and implementability is probably an issue. One exception is the File reader API, which allows read operations to be aborted. So there are situations where an ongoing asynchronous operation may need have to be aborted. Need to be discussed.

Best regards
  Claes
<image001.gif>

Claes Nilsson M.Sc.E.E
Master Engineer, Research
Technology Research - Advanced Application Lab

Sony Mobile Communications
 Phone:  +46 10 80 15178<tel:%2B46%2010%2080%2015178>
Mobile: +46 705 56 68 78<tel:%2B46%20705%2056%2068%2078>
Switchboard: +46 10 80 00000<tel:%2B46%2010%2080%2000000>
E-Mail: mailto:claes1.nilsson@sonymobile.com<mailto:claes1.nilsson@sonyericsson.com>
Visiting Address; Nya Vattentornet
SE-221 88 LUND,
Sweden
Disclaimer:
The information in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the named recipient(s) and access to this e-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. The views are those of the sender and not necessarily the views of Sony Ericsson and Sony Ericsson accepts no responsibility or liability whatsoever or howsoever arising in connection with this e-mail.Any attachment(s) to this message has been checked for viruses, but please rely on your own virus checker and procedures. If you contact us by e-mail, we will store your name and address to facilitate communications. If you are not the intended recipient, please inform the sender by replying this transmission and delete the e-mail and any copies of it without disclosing it.



________________________________

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx