W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-websignage@w3.org > December 2012

Gap analysis: SCXML (was Re: Gap analysis: SMIL)

From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 13:39:16 +0900
Message-ID: <50C172F4.1080706@w3.org>
To: Futomi Hatano <futomi.hatano@newphoria.co.jp>
CC: public-websignage@w3.org
Hi Futomi,

Thanks for providing your view.

However, I'm not sure why you don't think SCXML is "realistic".

I thought Innes did mention during the June workshop that they
used SCXML and proposed to use it as a way to express interactive
state transition for advanced signage services.

Please see page 23 of their slides at:
 
http://www.w3.org/2012/06/signage/slides/Innes/Innes-press-Digital-Signage-Workshop-W3C-June-2012-Japan.pdf

So I think SCXML should be also included in the gap analysis [1],
though there is of course a possibility it won't be included
in the final Requirements document.

[1] 
http://www.w3.org/community/websignage/wiki/Web-based_Signage_Use_cases_and_Requirements#R1._Making_contents_using_a_declarative_approach

Thanks,

Kazuyuki


On 12/07/2012 01:15 PM, Futomi Hatano wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 04:55:11 +0900
> Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org> wrote:
>
>> For example, as I mentioned at the Web-based Signage Workshop in June
>> [1], even SCXML could be another "related existing standard" here.
>>
>> Also we should concentrate on thinking about "what is actually
>> necessary and valuable" as Charles mentioned above rather than
>> rejecting any possibilities at least at the gap analysis stage.
>
> Thanks for letting me know about SCXML.
> Although SCXML could be a candidate for new-gen SMIL
> as you mentioned at the workshop, I think it has lower possibility
> to be accepted by signage industry than SMIL.
>
> It seems to be similar to the topic discussed in W3C and
> web communities years ago: "XHTML 2 vs. HTML5".
> I think SMIL supporters in signage industry would like to
> extend SMIL rather than adopting or developing a new language.
>
> Although the doc should include all possibilities as gap analysis,
> it must be realistic. I don't think SCXML is realistic for now.
> "Realistic" means the possibility that SCXML will be implemented
> in web browsers and there are some supporters.
> As far as I know, no one in signage industry support SCXML.
> So I don't think we need to add SCXML in the doc now.
>
> At least, SMIL is realistic. there are some enthusiastic supporters,
> and it has already implemented some web browsers, and we can
> use it (maybe animation only) in HTML through inline SVG now.
>
> But I don't deny SCXML completely. If it become realistic
> and we believe it is useful for creating signage contents,
> then we should consider it.
>
> Cheers,
> Futomi
>
> --
> Newphoria Corporation
> Chief Technology Officer
> Futomi Hatano
> --
> futomi.hatano@newphoria.co.jp
> http://www.newphoria.co.jp/
>


-- 
Kaz Ashimura, W3C Staff Contact for Web&TV, MMI and Voice
Tel: +81 466 49 1170
Received on Friday, 7 December 2012 04:39:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 7 December 2012 04:39:55 GMT